chapter three of research project

• 230,715 Views

HOW TO WRITE CHAPTER THREE OF YOUR RESEARCH PROJECT (RESEARCH METHODOLOGY) | ResearchWap Blog

• Posted: Friday, 17 April 2020
• By: ResearchWap Admin

How To Write Chapter Three Of Your Research Project (Research Methodology)

Methodology In Research Paper

Chapter three of the research project or the research methodology is another significant part of the research project writing. In developing the chapter three of the research project, you state the purpose of research, research method you wish to adopt, the instruments to be used, where you will collect your data, types of data collection, and how you collected it.

This chapter explains the different methods to be used in the research project. Here you mention the procedures and strategies you will employ in the study such as research design, study design in research, research area (area of the study), the population of the study, etc.

You also tell the reader your research design methods, why you chose a particular method, method of analysis, how you planned to analyze your data. Your methodology should be written in a simple language such that other researchers can follow the method and arrive at the same conclusion or findings.

You can choose a survey design when you want to survey a particular location or behavior by administering instruments such as structured questionnaires, interviews, or experimental; if you intend manipulating some variables.

The purpose of chapter three (research methodology) is to give an experienced investigator enough information to replicate the study. Some supervisors do not understand this and require students to write what is in effect, a textbook.

A research design is used to structure the research and to show how all of the major parts of the research project, including the sample, measures, and methods of assignment, work together to address the central research questions in the study. The chapter three should begin with a paragraph reiterating the purpose of research.

It is very important that before choosing design methods, try and ask yourself the following questions:

Will I generate enough information that will help me to solve the research problem by adopting this method?

Method vs Methodology

I think the most appropriate in methods versus methodology is to think in terms of their inter-connectedness and relationship between both. You should not beging thinking so much about research methods without thinking of developing a research methodology.

Metodologia or methodology is the consideration of your research objectives and the most effective method  and approach to meet those objectives. That is to say that methodology in research paper is the first step in planning a research project work. 

Design Methodology: Methodological Approach                

Example of methodology in research paper, you are attempting to identify the influence of personality on a road accident, you may wish to look at different personality types, you may also look at accident records from the FRSC, you may also wish to look at the personality of drivers that are accident victims, once you adopt this method, you are already doing a survey, and that becomes your  metodologia or methodology .

Your methodology should aim to provide you with the information to allow you to come to some conclusions about the personalities that are susceptible to a road accident or those personality types that are likely to have a road accident. The following subjects may or may not be in the order required by a particular institution of higher education, but all of the subjects constitute a defensible in metodologia or methodology chapter.

 READ ALSO:  HOW TO WRITE EFFECTIVE RESEARCH PROJECT ABSTRACT

Methodology

A  methodology  is the rationale for the research approach, and the lens through which the analysis occurs. Said another way, a methodology describes the “general research strategy that outlines the way in which research is to be undertaken” The methodology should impact which method(s) for a research endeavor are selected in order to generate the compelling data.

Example Of Methodology In Research Paper :

• Phenomenology: describes the “lived experience” of a particular phenomenon
• Ethnography: explores the social world or culture, shared beliefs and behaviors
• Participatory: views the participants as active researchers
• Ethno methodology: examines how people use dialogue and body language to construct a world view
• Grounding theory*: assumes a blank slate and uses an inductive approach to develop a new theory

A  method  is simply the tool used to answer your research questions — how, in short, you will go about collecting your data.

Methods Section Of Research Paper Example :

• Contextual inquiry
• Usability study
• Diary study

If you are choosing among these, you might say “what method should I use?” and settle on one or more methods to answer your research question.

 READ ALSO:  HOW TO DEVELOP EFFECTIVE AND UNIQUE PROJECT TOPICS

Research Design Definition: WRITING A RESEARCH DESIGN

A qualitative study does not have variables. A scientific study has variables, which are sometimes mentioned in Chapter 1 and defined in more depth in Chapter 3. Spell out the independent and dependent, variables. An unfortunate trend in some institutions is to repeat the research questions and/or hypotheses in both Chapter 1 and Chapter 3. Sometimes an operational statement of the research hypotheses in the null form is given to set the stage for later statistical inferences. In a quantitative study, state the level of significance that will be used to accept or reject the hypotheses.

Pilot Study

In a quantitative study, a survey instrument that the researcher designed needs a pilot study to validate the effectiveness of the instrument, and the value of the questions to elicit the right information to answer the primary research questions in. In a scientific study, a pilot study may precede the main observation to correct any problems with the instrumentation or other elements in the data collection technique. Describe the pilot study as it relates to the research design, development of the instrument, data collection procedures, or characteristics of the sample.

Instruments

In a research study, the instrument used to collect data may be created by the researcher or based on an existing instrument. If the instrument is the researcher created, the process used to select the questions should be described and justified. If an existing instrument is used, the background of the instrument is described including who originated it, and what measures were used to validate it.

If a Likert scale is used, the scale should be described. If the study involves interviews, an interview protocol should be developed that will result in a consistent process of data collection across all interviews. Two types of questions are found in an interview protocol: the primary research questions, which are not asked of the participants, and the interview questions that are based on the primary research questions and are asked of the participants.

In a qualitative study, this is the section where most of the appendices are itemized, starting with letters of permission to conduct the study and letters of invitation to participate with the attached consent forms. Sample: this has to do with the number of your participants or subjects as the case may be. Analysis (how are you planning to analyze the results?)

ALSO READ:  TRENDING PROJECT TOPICS FOR FINAL YEAR STUDENTS AT A GLANCE

EFFECTIVE GUIDE AND METHODOLOGY SAMPLES

This chapter deals effectively with the research methods to be adopted in conducting the research, and it is organized under the following sub-headings:

• Research Design
• Area of Study

The population of the Study

• Sample and Sampling Techniques
• Instruments for Data Collection

The validity of the Instrument

Reliability of the Instrument

• Administration of the instruments
• Scoring the instruments

Method of Data Collection

Method of Data Analysis

Research Design:

This has to do with the structure of the research instrument to be used in collecting data. It could be in sections depending on different variables that form the construct for the entire topic of the research problems. A reliable instrument with a wrong research design will adversely affect the reliability and generalization of the research. The choice of design suitable for each research is determined by many factors among which are: kind of research, research hypothesis, the scope of the research, and the sensitive nature of the research.

Area of Study:

Research Area; this has to do with the geographical environment of the study area where the places are located, the historical background when necessary and commercial activities of that geographical area. For example, the area of the study is Ebonyi State University. At the creation of Ebonyi State in 1996, the Abakaliki campus of the then ESUT was upgraded to Ebonyi State University College by Edict no. 5 of Ebonyi State, 1998 still affiliated to ESUT with Prof. Fidelis Ogah, former ESUT Deputy Vice-Chancellor as the first Rector. In 1997, the Faculty of Applied and Natural Sciences with 8 departments was added to the fledging University, and later in 1998 when the ESUT Pre-Science Programme was relocated to Nsukka, the EBSUC Pre-Degree School commenced lectures in both Science and Arts in replacement of the former. This study focused on the students of the Business Education department in Ebonyi state university.

The population is regarded in research work as the type of people and the group of people under investigation. It has to be specific or specified. For example educational study teachers in Lagos state. Once the population is chosen, the next thing is to choose the samples from the population.

According to Uma (2007), the population is referred to as the totality of items or object which the researcher is interested in. It can also be the total number of people in an area of study. Hence, the population of this study comprised of all the students in the department of Business Education, Ebonyi State University which is made up of year one to four totaling 482. The actual number for the study was ascertained using Yaro-Yamane's formula which stated thus:

n   =        N

N is the Population

1 is constant

e is the error margin

Then, n   =         482

1+482(0.05)2

= 214.35 approximately 214

Sample and sampling technique:

It may not be possible to reach out to the number of people that form the entire population for the study to either interview, observe, or serve them with copies of the questionnaire. To be realistic, the sample should be up to 20% of the total population. Two sampling techniques are popular among all the sampling techniques. These are random and stratified random sampling techniques. (A). in Random Sampling, the writers select any specific number from a place like a school, village, etc. (B). In Stratified Random Sampling, one has to indicate a specific number from a stratum which could be a group of people according to age, qualification, etc. or different groups from different locations and different considerations attached.

Instruments for Data Collection:

This is a device or different devices used in collecting data. Example: interview, questionnaire, checklist, etc. instrument is prepared in sets or subsections, each set should be an entity thus asking questions about a particular variable to be tested after collecting data. The type of instrument used will determine the responses expected. All questions should be well set so as to determine the reliability of the instrument.

This has to do with different measures in order to determine the validity and reliability of the research instrument. For example, presenting the drafted questionnaire to the supervisor for scrutiny. Giving the questionnaire to the supervisor for useful comments and corrections would help to validate the instrument.

The test-retest reliability method is one of the simplest ways of testing the stability and reliability of an instrument over time. The test-retest approach was adopted by the researcher in establishing the reliability of the instrument. In doing this 25 copies of the questionnaire were administered on twenty-five selected respondents. After two weeks another 25 copies of the same questionnaire were re-administered on the same group. Their responses on the two occasions were correlated using Parsons Product Moment Correlation. A co-efficient of 0.81 was gotten and this was high enough to consider the instrument reliable.

Administration of the instruments:

Here, the writer states whether he or she administers the test personally or through an assistant. He also indicates the rate of return of the copies of the questionnaire administered.

Scoring the instruments:

Here items on the questionnaire or any other device used must be assigned numerical values. For example, 4 points to strongly agree, 3 points to agree, 2 points to disagree, and 1 point to strongly disagree.

Table of Analysis

The researcher collected data using the questionnaire. Copies of the questionnaire were administered by the researcher on the respondents. All the respondents were expected to give maximum co-operation, as the information on the questionnaire is all on things that revolve around their study. Hence, enough time was taken to explain how to tick or indicate their opinion on the items stated in the research questionnaire.

In this study, the mean was used to analyze the data collected. A four (4) point Likert scale was used to analyze each of the questionnaire items.

The weighing was as follows:

VGE—————- Very Great Extent (4 points)

GE—————– Great Extent (3 points)

LE—————– Little Extent (2 points)

VLE—————- Very Little Extent (1 point)

SA—————– Strongly Agree (4 points)

A——————- Agree (3 points)

D—————— Disagree (2 points)

SD—————- Strongly Disagree (1 point)

The mean of the scale will then be determined by summing up the points and dividing their number as follows with the formula:

Where; x= mean

f= frequency

X= Nominal value of the option

∑= summation

N= Total Number

Therefore, the mean of the scale is 2.5.

This means that any item statement with a mean of 2.50 and above is considered agreed by the respondents and any item statement below 2.5 is considered disagreed.

EDITORS SOURCE: How To Write Chapter Three Of Your Research Project (Research Methodology)

Tags: Research project, chapter three, methodology, project topics,

Project Categories

• AFRICAN LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTIC
• ACCOUNTING EDUCATION
• ACTUARIAL SCIENCE
• ADULT EDUCATION
• AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
• AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION
• ANIMAL SCIENCE
• ARCHITECTURE
• BANKING AND FINANCE
• BIBLICAL AND THEOLOGY
• BIOCHEMISTRY
• BREWING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
• BUILDING TECHNOLOGY
• BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
• BUSINESS EDUCATION

SEE MORE PROJECT CATEGORIES

Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved researchwap.com - Project Topics Ideas and Materials for Final Year Students

404 Not found

404 Not found

Chapter 3 The Research Process

In Chapter 1, we saw that scientific research is the process of acquiring scientific knowledge using the scientific method. But how is such research conducted? This chapter delves into the process of scientific research, and the assumptions and outcomes of the research process.

Paradigms of Social Research

Our design and conduct of research is shaped by our mental models or frames of references that we use to organize our reasoning and observations. These mental models or frames (belief systems) are called paradigms. The word “paradigm” was popularized by

Thomas Kuhn (1962) in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, where he examined the history of the natural sciences to identify patterns of activities that shape the progress of science. Similar ideas are applicable to social sciences as well, where a social reality can be viewed by different people in different ways, which may constrain their thinking and reasoning about the observed phenomenon. For instance, conservatives and liberals tend to have very different perceptions of the role of government in people’s lives, and hence, have different opinions on how to solve social problems. Conservatives may believe that lowering taxes is the best way to stimulate a stagnant economy because it increases people’s disposable income and spending, which in turn expands business output and employment. In contrast, liberals may believe that governments should invest more directly in job creation programs such as public works and infrastructure projects, which will increase employment and people’s ability to consume and drive the economy. Likewise, Western societies place greater emphasis on individual rights, such as one’s right to privacy, right of free speech, and right to bear arms. In contrast, Asian societies tend to balance the rights of individuals against the rights of families, organizations, and the government, and therefore tend to be more communal and less individualistic in their policies. Such differences in perspective often lead Westerners to criticize Asian governments for being autocratic, while Asians criticize Western societies for being greedy, having high crime rates, and creating a “cult of the individual.” Our personal paradigms are like “colored glasses” that govern how we view the world and how we structure our thoughts about what we see in the world.

Paradigms are often hard to recognize, because they are implicit, assumed, and taken for granted. However, recognizing these paradigms is key to making sense of and reconciling differences in people’ perceptions of the same social phenomenon. For instance, why do liberals believe that the best way to improve secondary education is to hire more teachers, but conservatives believe that privatizing education (using such means as school vouchers) are more effective in achieving the same goal? Because conservatives place more faith in competitive markets (i.e., in free competition between schools competing for education dollars), while liberals believe more in labor (i.e., in having more teachers and schools). Likewise, in social science research, if one were to understand why a certain technology was successfully implemented in one organization but failed miserably in another, a researcher looking at the world through a “rational lens” will look for rational explanations of the problem such as inadequate technology or poor fit between technology and the task context where it is being utilized, while another research looking at the same problem through a “social lens” may seek out social deficiencies such as inadequate user training or lack of management support, while those seeing it through a “political lens” will look for instances of organizational politics that may subvert the technology implementation process. Hence, subconscious paradigms often constrain the concepts that researchers attempt to measure, their observations, and their subsequent interpretations of a phenomenon. However, given the complex nature of social phenomenon, it is possible that all of the above paradigms are partially correct, and that a fuller understanding of the problem may require an understanding and application of multiple paradigms.

Two popular paradigms today among social science researchers are positivism and post-positivism. Positivism , based on the works of French philosopher Auguste Comte (1798-1857), was the dominant scientific paradigm until the mid-20 th century. It holds that science or knowledge creation should be restricted to what can be observed and measured. Positivism tends to rely exclusively on theories that can be directly tested. Though positivism was originally an attempt to separate scientific inquiry from religion (where the precepts could not be objectively observed), positivism led to empiricism or a blind faith in observed data and a rejection of any attempt to extend or reason beyond observable facts. Since human thoughts and emotions could not be directly measured, there were not considered to be legitimate topics for scientific research. Frustrations with the strictly empirical nature of positivist philosophy led to the development of post-positivism (or postmodernism) during the mid-late 20 th century. Post-positivism argues that one can make reasonable inferences about a phenomenon by combining empirical observations with logical reasoning. Post-positivists view science as not certain but probabilistic (i.e., based on many contingencies), and often seek to explore these contingencies to understand social reality better. The post -positivist camp has further fragmented into subjectivists , who view the world as a subjective construction of our subjective minds rather than as an objective reality, and critical realists , who believe that there is an external reality that is independent of a person’s thinking but we can never know such reality with any degree of certainty.

Burrell and Morgan (1979), in their seminal book Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis, suggested that the way social science researchers view and study social phenomena is shaped by two fundamental sets of philosophical assumptions: ontology and epistemology. Ontology refers to our assumptions about how we see the world, e.g., does the world consist mostly of social order or constant change. Epistemology refers to our assumptions about the best way to study the world, e.g., should we use an objective or subjective approach to study social reality. Using these two sets of assumptions, we can categorize social science research as belonging to one of four categories (see Figure 3.1).

If researchers view the world as consisting mostly of social order (ontology) and hence seek to study patterns of ordered events or behaviors, and believe that the best way to study such a world is using objective approach (epistemology) that is independent of the person conducting the observation or interpretation, such as by using standardized data collection tools like surveys, then they are adopting a paradigm of functionalism . However, if they believe that the best way to study social order is though the subjective interpretation of participants involved, such as by interviewing different participants and reconciling differences among their responses using their own subjective perspectives, then they are employing an interpretivism paradigm. If researchers believe that the world consists of radical change and seek to understand or enact change using an objectivist approach, then they are employing a radical structuralism paradigm. If they wish to understand social change using the subjective perspectives of the participants involved, then they are following a radical humanism paradigm.

Figure 3.1. Four paradigms of social science research (Source: Burrell and Morgan, 1979)

Figure 3.2. Functionalistic research process

The first phase of research is exploration . This phase includes exploring and selecting research questions for further investigation, examining the published literature in the area of inquiry to understand the current state of knowledge in that area, and identifying theories that may help answer the research questions of interest.

The first step in the exploration phase is identifying one or more research questions dealing with a specific behavior, event, or phenomena of interest. Research questions are specific questions about a behavior, event, or phenomena of interest that you wish to seek answers for in your research. Examples include what factors motivate consumers to purchase goods and services online without knowing the vendors of these goods or services, how can we make high school students more creative, and why do some people commit terrorist acts. Research questions can delve into issues of what, why, how, when, and so forth. More interesting research questions are those that appeal to a broader population (e.g., “how can firms innovate” is a more interesting research question than “how can Chinese firms innovate in the service-sector”), address real and complex problems (in contrast to hypothetical or “toy” problems), and where the answers are not obvious. Narrowly focused research questions (often with a binary yes/no answer) tend to be less useful and less interesting and less suited to capturing the subtle nuances of social phenomena. Uninteresting research questions generally lead to uninteresting and unpublishable research findings.

The next step is to conduct a literature review of the domain of interest. The purpose of a literature review is three-fold: (1) to survey the current state of knowledge in the area of inquiry, (2) to identify key authors, articles, theories, and findings in that area, and (3) to identify gaps in knowledge in that research area. Literature review is commonly done today using computerized keyword searches in online databases. Keywords can be combined using “and” and “or” operations to narrow down or expand the search results. Once a shortlist of relevant articles is generated from the keyword search, the researcher must then manually browse through each article, or at least its abstract section, to determine the suitability of that article for a detailed review. Literature reviews should be reasonably complete, and not restricted to a few journals, a few years, or a specific methodology. Reviewed articles may be summarized in the form of tables, and can be further structured using organizing frameworks such as a concept matrix. A well-conducted literature review should indicate whether the initial research questions have already been addressed in the literature (which would obviate the need to study them again), whether there are newer or more interesting research questions available, and whether the original research questions should be modified or changed in light of findings of the literature review. The review can also provide some intuitions or potential answers to the questions of interest and/or help identify theories that have previously been used to address similar questions.

Since functionalist (deductive) research involves theory-testing, the third step is to identify one or more theories can help address the desired research questions. While the literature review may uncover a wide range of concepts or constructs potentially related to the phenomenon of interest, a theory will help identify which of these constructs is logically relevant to the target phenomenon and how. Forgoing theories may result in measuring a wide range of less relevant, marginally relevant, or irrelevant constructs, while also minimizing the chances of obtaining results that are meaningful and not by pure chance. In functionalist research, theories can be used as the logical basis for postulating hypotheses for empirical testing. Obviously, not all theories are well-suited for studying all social phenomena. Theories must be carefully selected based on their fit with the target problem and the extent to which their assumptions are consistent with that of the target problem. We will examine theories and the process of theorizing in detail in the next chapter.

The next phase in the research process is research design . This process is concerned with creating a blueprint of the activities to take in order to satisfactorily answer the research questions identified in the exploration phase. This includes selecting a research method, operationalizing constructs of interest, and devising an appropriate sampling strategy.

Operationalization is the process of designing precise measures for abstract theoretical constructs. This is a major problem in social science research, given that many of the constructs, such as prejudice, alienation, and liberalism are hard to define, let alone measure accurately. Operationalization starts with specifying an “operational definition” (or “conceptualization”) of the constructs of interest. Next, the researcher can search the literature to see if there are existing prevalidated measures matching their operational definition that can be used directly or modified to measure their constructs of interest. If such measures are not available or if existing measures are poor or reflect a different conceptualization than that intended by the researcher, new instruments may have to be designed for measuring those constructs. This means specifying exactly how exactly the desired construct will be measured (e.g., how many items, what items, and so forth). This can easily be a long and laborious process, with multiple rounds of pretests and modifications before the newly designed instrument can be accepted as “scientifically valid.” We will discuss operationalization of constructs in a future chapter on measurement.

Simultaneously with operationalization, the researcher must also decide what research method they wish to employ for collecting data to address their research questions of interest. Such methods may include quantitative methods such as experiments or survey research or qualitative methods such as case research or action research, or possibly a combination of both. If an experiment is desired, then what is the experimental design? If survey, do you plan a mail survey, telephone survey, web survey, or a combination? For complex, uncertain, and multi-faceted social phenomena, multi-method approaches may be more suitable, which may help leverage the unique strengths of each research method and generate insights that may not be obtained using a single method.

Researchers must also carefully choose the target population from which they wish to collect data, and a sampling strategy to select a sample from that population. For instance, should they survey individuals or firms or workgroups within firms? What types of individuals or firms they wish to target? Sampling strategy is closely related to the unit of analysis in a research problem. While selecting a sample, reasonable care should be taken to avoid a biased sample (e.g., sample based on convenience) that may generate biased observations. Sampling is covered in depth in a later chapter.

At this stage, it is often a good idea to write a research proposal detailing all of the decisions made in the preceding stages of the research process and the rationale behind each decision. This multi-part proposal should address what research questions you wish to study and why, the prior state of knowledge in this area, theories you wish to employ along with hypotheses to be tested, how to measure constructs, what research method to be employed and why, and desired sampling strategy. Funding agencies typically require such a proposal in order to select the best proposals for funding. Even if funding is not sought for a research project, a proposal may serve as a useful vehicle for seeking feedback from other researchers and identifying potential problems with the research project (e.g., whether some important constructs were missing from the study) before starting data collection. This initial feedback is invaluable because it is often too late to correct critical problems after data is collected in a research study.

Having decided who to study (subjects), what to measure (concepts), and how to collect data (research method), the researcher is now ready to proceed to the research execution phase. This includes pilot testing the measurement instruments, data collection, and data analysis.

Pilot testing is an often overlooked but extremely important part of the research process. It helps detect potential problems in your research design and/or instrumentation (e.g., whether the questions asked is intelligible to the targeted sample), and to ensure that the measurement instruments used in the study are reliable and valid measures of the constructs of interest. The pilot sample is usually a small subset of the target population. After a successful pilot testing, the researcher may then proceed with data collection using the sampled population. The data collected may be quantitative or qualitative, depending on the research method employed.

Following data collection, the data is analyzed and interpreted for the purpose of drawing conclusions regarding the research questions of interest. Depending on the type of data collected (quantitative or qualitative), data analysis may be quantitative (e.g., employ statistical techniques such as regression or structural equation modeling) or qualitative (e.g., coding or content analysis).

The final phase of research involves preparing the final research report documenting the entire research process and its findings in the form of a research paper, dissertation, or monograph. This report should outline in detail all the choices made during the research process (e.g., theory used, constructs selected, measures used, research methods, sampling, etc.) and why, as well as the outcomes of each phase of the research process. The research process must be described in sufficient detail so as to allow other researchers to replicate your study, test the findings, or assess whether the inferences derived are scientifically acceptable. Of course, having a ready research proposal will greatly simplify and quicken the process of writing the finished report. Note that research is of no value unless the research process and outcomes are documented for future generations; such documentation is essential for the incremental progress of science.

Common Mistakes in Research

The research process is fraught with problems and pitfalls, and novice researchers often find, after investing substantial amounts of time and effort into a research project, that their research questions were not sufficiently answered, or that the findings were not interesting enough, or that the research was not of “acceptable” scientific quality. Such problems typically result in research papers being rejected by journals. Some of the more frequent mistakes are described below.

Insufficiently motivated research questions. Often times, we choose our “pet” problems that are interesting to us but not to the scientific community at large, i.e., it does not generate new knowledge or insight about the phenomenon being investigated. Because the research process involves a significant investment of time and effort on the researcher’s part, the researcher must be certain (and be able to convince others) that the research questions they seek to answer in fact deal with real problems (and not hypothetical problems) that affect a substantial portion of a population and has not been adequately addressed in prior research.

Pursuing research fads. Another common mistake is pursuing “popular” topics with limited shelf life. A typical example is studying technologies or practices that are popular today. Because research takes several years to complete and publish, it is possible that popular interest in these fads may die down by the time the research is completed and submitted for publication. A better strategy may be to study “timeless” topics that have always persisted through the years.

Unresearchable problems. Some research problems may not be answered adequately based on observed evidence alone, or using currently accepted methods and procedures. Such problems are best avoided. However, some unresearchable, ambiguously defined problems may be modified or fine tuned into well-defined and useful researchable problems.

Favored research methods. Many researchers have a tendency to recast a research problem so that it is amenable to their favorite research method (e.g., survey research). This is an unfortunate trend. Research methods should be chosen to best fit a research problem, and not the other way around.

Blind data mining. Some researchers have the tendency to collect data first (using instruments that are already available), and then figure out what to do with it. Note that data collection is only one step in a long and elaborate process of planning, designing, and executing research. In fact, a series of other activities are needed in a research process prior to data collection. If researchers jump into data collection without such elaborate planning, the data collected will likely be irrelevant, imperfect, or useless, and their data collection efforts may be entirely wasted. An abundance of data cannot make up for deficits in research planning and design, and particularly, for the lack of interesting research questions.

• Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices. Authored by : Anol Bhattacherjee. Provided by : University of South Florida. Located at : http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/oa_textbooks/3/ . License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

How To Write The Methodology Chapter

The what, why & how explained simply (with examples).

By: Jenna Crossley (PhD) | Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | September 2021 (Updated April 2023)

So, you’ve pinned down your research topic and undertaken a review of the literature – now it’s time to write up the methodology section of your dissertation, thesis or research paper . But what exactly is the methodology chapter all about – and how do you go about writing one? In this post, we’ll unpack the topic, step by step .

Overview: The Methodology Chapter

• The purpose  of the methodology chapter
• Why you need to craft this chapter (really) well
• How to write and structure the chapter
• Methodology chapter example
• Essential takeaways

What (exactly) is the methodology chapter?

The methodology chapter is where you outline the philosophical underpinnings of your research and outline the specific methodological choices you’ve made. The point of the methodology chapter is to tell the reader exactly how you designed your study and, just as importantly, why you did it this way.

Importantly, this chapter should comprehensively describe and justify all the methodological choices you made in your study. For example, the approach you took to your research (i.e., qualitative, quantitative or mixed), who  you collected data from (i.e., your sampling strategy), how you collected your data and, of course, how you analysed it. If that sounds a little intimidating, don’t worry – we’ll explain all these methodological choices in this post .

Why is the methodology chapter important?

The methodology chapter plays two important roles in your dissertation or thesis:

Firstly, it demonstrates your understanding of research theory, which is what earns you marks. A flawed research design or methodology would mean flawed results. So, this chapter is vital as it allows you to show the marker that you know what you’re doing and that your results are credible .

Secondly, the methodology chapter is what helps to make your study replicable. In other words, it allows other researchers to undertake your study using the same methodological approach, and compare their findings to yours. This is very important within academic research, as each study builds on previous studies.

The methodology chapter is also important in that it allows you to identify and discuss any methodological issues or problems you encountered (i.e., research limitations ), and to explain how you mitigated the impacts of these. Every research project has its limitations , so it’s important to acknowledge these openly and highlight your study’s value despite its limitations . Doing so demonstrates your understanding of research design, which will earn you marks. We’ll discuss limitations in a bit more detail later in this post, so stay tuned!

Need a helping hand?

How to write up the methodology chapter

First off, it’s worth noting that the exact structure and contents of the methodology chapter will vary depending on the field of research (e.g., humanities, chemistry or engineering) as well as the university . So, be sure to always check the guidelines provided by your institution for clarity and, if possible, review past dissertations from your university. Here we’re going to discuss a generic structure for a methodology chapter typically found in the sciences.

Before you start writing, it’s always a good idea to draw up a rough outline to guide your writing. Don’t just start writing without knowing what you’ll discuss where. If you do, you’ll likely end up with a disjointed, ill-flowing narrative . You’ll then waste a lot of time rewriting in an attempt to try to stitch all the pieces together. Do yourself a favour and start with the end in mind .

Section 1 – Introduction

As with all chapters in your dissertation or thesis, the methodology chapter should have a brief introduction. In this section, you should remind your readers what the focus of your study is, especially the research aims . As we’ve discussed many times on the blog, your methodology needs to align with your research aims, objectives and research questions. Therefore, it’s useful to frontload this component to remind the reader (and yourself!) what you’re trying to achieve.

In this section, you can also briefly mention how you’ll structure the chapter. This will help orient the reader and provide a bit of a roadmap so that they know what to expect. You don’t need a lot of detail here – just a brief outline will do.

Section 2 – The Methodology

The next section of your chapter is where you’ll present the actual methodology. In this section, you need to detail and justify the key methodological choices you’ve made in a logical, intuitive fashion. Importantly, this is the heart of your methodology chapter, so you need to get specific – don’t hold back on the details here. This is not one of those “less is more” situations.

Let’s take a look at the most common components you’ll likely need to cover. 

Methodological Choice #1 – Research Philosophy

Research philosophy refers to the underlying beliefs (i.e., the worldview) regarding how data about a phenomenon should be gathered , analysed and used . The research philosophy will serve as the core of your study and underpin all of the other research design choices, so it’s critically important that you understand which philosophy you’ll adopt and why you made that choice. If you’re not clear on this, take the time to get clarity before you make any further methodological choices.

While several research philosophies exist, two commonly adopted ones are positivism and interpretivism . These two sit roughly on opposite sides of the research philosophy spectrum.

Positivism states that the researcher can observe reality objectively and that there is only one reality, which exists independently of the observer. As a consequence, it is quite commonly the underlying research philosophy in quantitative studies and is oftentimes the assumed philosophy in the physical sciences.

Contrasted with this, interpretivism , which is often the underlying research philosophy in qualitative studies, assumes that the researcher performs a role in observing the world around them and that reality is unique to each observer . In other words, reality is observed subjectively .

These are just two philosophies (there are many more), but they demonstrate significantly different approaches to research and have a significant impact on all the methodological choices. Therefore, it’s vital that you clearly outline and justify your research philosophy at the beginning of your methodology chapter, as it sets the scene for everything that follows.

Methodological Choice #2 – Research Type

The next thing you would typically discuss in your methodology section is the research type. The starting point for this is to indicate whether the research you conducted is inductive or deductive .

Inductive research takes a bottom-up approach , where the researcher begins with specific observations or data and then draws general conclusions or theories from those observations. Therefore these studies tend to be exploratory in terms of approach.

Conversely , d eductive research takes a top-down approach , where the researcher starts with a theory or hypothesis and then tests it using specific observations or data. Therefore these studies tend to be confirmatory in approach.

Related to this, you’ll need to indicate whether your study adopts a qualitative, quantitative or mixed  approach. As we’ve mentioned, there’s a strong link between this choice and your research philosophy, so make sure that your choices are tightly aligned . When you write this section up, remember to clearly justify your choices, as they form the foundation of your study.

Methodological Choice #3 – Research Strategy

Next, you’ll need to discuss your research strategy (also referred to as a research design ). This methodological choice refers to the broader strategy in terms of how you’ll conduct your research, based on the aims of your study.

Several research strategies exist, including experimental , case studies , ethnography , grounded theory, action research , and phenomenology . Let’s take a look at two of these, experimental and ethnographic, to see how they contrast.

Experimental research makes use of the scientific method , where one group is the control group (in which no variables are manipulated ) and another is the experimental group (in which a specific variable is manipulated). This type of research is undertaken under strict conditions in a controlled, artificial environment (e.g., a laboratory). By having firm control over the environment, experimental research typically allows the researcher to establish causation between variables. Therefore, it can be a good choice if you have research aims that involve identifying causal relationships.

Ethnographic research , on the other hand, involves observing and capturing the experiences and perceptions of participants in their natural environment (for example, at home or in the office). In other words, in an uncontrolled environment.  Naturally, this means that this research strategy would be far less suitable if your research aims involve identifying causation, but it would be very valuable if you’re looking to explore and examine a group culture, for example.

As you can see, the right research strategy will depend largely on your research aims and research questions – in other words, what you’re trying to figure out. Therefore, as with every other methodological choice, it’s essential to justify why you chose the research strategy you did.

Methodological Choice #4 – Time Horizon

The next thing you’ll need to detail in your methodology chapter is the time horizon. There are two options here: cross-sectional and longitudinal . In other words, whether the data for your study were all collected at one point in time (cross-sectional) or at multiple points in time (longitudinal).

The choice you make here depends again on your research aims, objectives and research questions. If, for example, you aim to assess how a specific group of people’s perspectives regarding a topic change over time , you’d likely adopt a longitudinal time horizon.

Another important factor to consider is simply whether you have the time necessary to adopt a longitudinal approach (which could involve collecting data over multiple months or even years). Oftentimes, the time pressures of your degree program will force your hand into adopting a cross-sectional time horizon, so keep this in mind.

Methodological Choice #5 – Sampling Strategy

Next, you’ll need to discuss your sampling strategy . There are two main categories of sampling, probability and non-probability sampling.

Probability sampling involves a random (and therefore representative) selection of participants from a population, whereas non-probability sampling entails selecting participants in a non-random  (and therefore non-representative) manner. For example, selecting participants based on ease of access (this is called a convenience sample).

The right sampling approach depends largely on what you’re trying to achieve in your study. Specifically, whether you trying to develop findings that are generalisable to a population or not. Practicalities and resource constraints also play a large role here, as it can oftentimes be challenging to gain access to a truly random sample. In the video below, we explore some of the most common sampling strategies.

Methodological Choice #6 – Data Collection Method

Next up, you’ll need to explain how you’ll go about collecting the necessary data for your study. Your data collection method (or methods) will depend on the type of data that you plan to collect – in other words, qualitative or quantitative data.

Typically, quantitative research relies on surveys , data generated by lab equipment, analytics software or existing datasets. Qualitative research, on the other hand, often makes use of collection methods such as interviews , focus groups , participant observations, and ethnography.

So, as you can see, there is a tight link between this section and the design choices you outlined in earlier sections. Strong alignment between these sections, as well as your research aims and questions is therefore very important.

Methodological Choice #7 – Data Analysis Methods/Techniques

The final major methodological choice that you need to address is that of analysis techniques . In other words, how you’ll go about analysing your date once you’ve collected it. Here it’s important to be very specific about your analysis methods and/or techniques – don’t leave any room for interpretation. Also, as with all choices in this chapter, you need to justify each choice you make.

What exactly you discuss here will depend largely on the type of study you’re conducting (i.e., qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods). For qualitative studies, common analysis methods include content analysis , thematic analysis and discourse analysis . In the video below, we explain each of these in plain language.

For quantitative studies, you’ll almost always make use of descriptive statistics , and in many cases, you’ll also use inferential statistical techniques (e.g., correlation and regression analysis). In the video below, we unpack some of the core concepts involved in descriptive and inferential statistics.

In this section of your methodology chapter, it’s also important to discuss how you prepared your data for analysis, and what software you used (if any). For example, quantitative data will often require some initial preparation such as removing duplicates or incomplete responses . Similarly, qualitative data will often require transcription and perhaps even translation. As always, remember to state both what you did and why you did it.

Section 3 – The Methodological Limitations

With the key methodological choices outlined and justified, the next step is to discuss the limitations of your design. No research methodology is perfect – there will always be trade-offs between the “ideal” methodology and what’s practical and viable, given your constraints. Therefore, this section of your methodology chapter is where you’ll discuss the trade-offs you had to make, and why these were justified given the context.

Methodological limitations can vary greatly from study to study, ranging from common issues such as time and budget constraints to issues of sample or selection bias . For example, you may find that you didn’t manage to draw in enough respondents to achieve the desired sample size (and therefore, statistically significant results), or your sample may be skewed heavily towards a certain demographic, thereby negatively impacting representativeness .

In this section, it’s important to be critical of the shortcomings of your study. There’s no use trying to hide them (your marker will be aware of them regardless). By being critical, you’ll demonstrate to your marker that you have a strong understanding of research theory, so don’t be shy here. At the same time, don’t beat your study to death . State the limitations, why these were justified, how you mitigated their impacts to the best degree possible, and how your study still provides value despite these limitations .

Section 4 – Concluding Summary

Finally, it’s time to wrap up the methodology chapter with a brief concluding summary. In this section, you’ll want to concisely summarise what you’ve presented in the chapter. Here, it can be a good idea to use a figure to summarise the key decisions, especially if your university recommends using a specific model (for example, Saunders’ Research Onion ).

Importantly, this section needs to be brief – a paragraph or two maximum (it’s a summary, after all). Also, make sure that when you write up your concluding summary, you include only what you’ve already discussed in your chapter; don’t add any new information.

Methodology Chapter Example

In the video below, we walk you through an example of a high-quality research methodology chapter from a dissertation. We also unpack our free methodology chapter template so that you can see how best to structure your chapter.

Wrapping Up

And there you have it – the methodology chapter in a nutshell. As we’ve mentioned, the exact contents and structure of this chapter can vary between universities , so be sure to check in with your institution before you start writing. If possible, try to find dissertations or theses from former students of your specific degree program – this will give you a strong indication of the expectations and norms when it comes to the methodology chapter (and all the other chapters!).

Also, remember the golden rule of the methodology chapter – justify every choice ! Make sure that you clearly explain the “why” for every “what”, and reference credible methodology textbooks or academic sources to back up your justifications.

If you need a helping hand with your research methodology (or any other component of your research), be sure to check out our private coaching service , where we hold your hand through every step of the research journey. Until next time, good luck!

Psst… there’s more (for free)

This post is part of our dissertation mini-course, which covers everything you need to get started with your dissertation, thesis or research project. 

You Might Also Like:

50 Comments

highly appreciated.

This was very helpful!

This was helpful

Thanks ,it is a very useful idea.

Thanks ,it is very useful idea.

Thank you so much, this information is very useful.

Thank you very much. I must say the information presented was succinct, coherent and invaluable. It is well put together and easy to comprehend. I have a great guide to create the research methodology for my dissertation.

Highly clear and useful.

I understand a bit on the explanation above. I want to have some coach but I’m still student and don’t have any budget to hire one. A lot of question I want to ask.

Thank you so much. This concluded my day plan. Thank you so much.

Thanks it was helpful

Great information. It would be great though if you could show us practical examples.

Thanks so much for this information. God bless and be with you

Thank you so so much. Indeed it was helpful

This is EXCELLENT!

I was totally confused by other explanations. Thank you so much!.

justdoing my research now , thanks for the guidance.

Thank uuuu! These contents are really valued for me!

This is powerful …I really like it

Highly useful and clear, thank you so much.

Highly appreciated. Good guide

That was helpful. Thanks

This is very useful.Thank you

Very helpful information. Thank you

This is exactly what I was looking for. The explanation is so detailed and easy to comprehend. Well done and thank you.

Great job. You just summarised everything in the easiest and most comprehensible way possible. Thanks a lot.

Thank you very much for the ideas you have given this will really help me a lot. Thank you and God Bless.

Such great effort …….very grateful thank you

Please accept my sincere gratitude. I have to say that the information that was delivered was congruent, concise, and quite helpful. It is clear and straightforward, making it simple to understand. I am in possession of an excellent manual that will assist me in developing the research methods for my dissertation.

Thank you for your great explanation. It really helped me construct my methodology paper.

thank you for simplifieng the methodoly, It was realy helpful

Very helpful!

Thank you for your great explanation.

The explanation I have been looking for. So clear Thank you

Thank you very much .this was more enlightening.

helped me create the in depth and thorough methodology for my dissertation

Thank you for the great explaination.please construct one methodology for me

I appreciate you for the explanation of methodology. Please construct one methodology on the topic: The effects influencing students dropout among schools for my thesis

This helped me complete my methods section of my dissertation with ease. I have managed to write a thorough and concise methodology!

its so good in deed

wow …what an easy to follow presentation. very invaluable content shared. utmost important.

Peace be upon you, I am Dr. Ahmed Khedr, a former part-time professor at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt. I am currently teaching research methods, and I have been dealing with your esteemed site for several years, and I found that despite my long experience with research methods sites, it is one of the smoothest sites for evaluating the material for students, For this reason, I relied on it a lot in teaching and translated most of what was written into Arabic and published it on my own page on Facebook. Thank you all… Everything I posted on my page is provided with the names of the writers of Grad coach, the title of the article, and the site. My best regards.

A remarkably simple and useful guide, thank you kindly.

I real appriciate your short and remarkable chapter summary

Bravo! Very helpful guide.

Only true experts could provide such helpful, fantastic, and inspiring knowledge about Methodology. Thank you very much! God be with you and us all!

highly appreciate your effort.

This is a very well thought out post. Very informative and a great read.

THANKS SO MUCH FOR SHARING YOUR NICE IDEA

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

Published on October 12, 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George. Revised on November 21, 2023.

A research proposal describes what you will investigate, why it’s important, and how you will conduct your research.

The format of a research proposal varies between fields, but most proposals will contain at least these elements:

Introduction

Literature review.

• Research design

Reference list

While the sections may vary, the overall objective is always the same. A research proposal serves as a blueprint and guide for your research plan, helping you get organized and feel confident in the path forward you choose to take.

Table of contents

Research proposal purpose, research proposal examples, research design and methods, contribution to knowledge, research schedule, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research proposals.

Academics often have to write research proposals to get funding for their projects. As a student, you might have to write a research proposal as part of a grad school application , or prior to starting your thesis or dissertation .

In addition to helping you figure out what your research can look like, a proposal can also serve to demonstrate why your project is worth pursuing to a funder, educational institution, or supervisor.

Research proposal length

The length of a research proposal can vary quite a bit. A bachelor’s or master’s thesis proposal can be just a few pages, while proposals for PhD dissertations or research funding are usually much longer and more detailed. Your supervisor can help you determine the best length for your work.

One trick to get started is to think of your proposal’s structure as a shorter version of your thesis or dissertation , only without the results , conclusion and discussion sections.

Download our research proposal template

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below.

• Example research proposal #1: “A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management”
• Example research proposal #2: “Medical Students as Mediators of Change in Tobacco Use”

Like your dissertation or thesis, the proposal will usually have a title page that includes:

• The proposed title of your project
• Your supervisor’s name
• Your institution and department

The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project. Make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why.

Your introduction should:

• Introduce your topic
• Give necessary background and context
• Outline your  problem statement  and research questions

To guide your introduction , include information about:

• Who could have an interest in the topic (e.g., scientists, policymakers)
• How much is already known about the topic
• What is missing from this current knowledge
• What new insights your research will contribute
• Why you believe this research is worth doing

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

As you get started, it’s important to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review  shows your reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said, but rather using existing research as a jumping-off point for your own.

In this section, share exactly how your project will contribute to ongoing conversations in the field by:

• Comparing and contrasting the main theories, methods, and debates
• Examining the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches
• Explaining how will you build on, challenge, or synthesize prior scholarship

Following the literature review, restate your main  objectives . This brings the focus back to your own project. Next, your research design or methodology section will describe your overall approach, and the practical steps you will take to answer your research questions.

To finish your proposal on a strong note, explore the potential implications of your research for your field. Emphasize again what you aim to contribute and why it matters.

For example, your results might have implications for:

• Improving best practices
• Informing policymaking decisions
• Strengthening a theory or model
• Challenging popular or scientific beliefs
• Creating a basis for future research

Last but not least, your research proposal must include correct citations for every source you have used, compiled in a reference list . To create citations quickly and easily, you can use our free APA citation generator .

Some institutions or funders require a detailed timeline of the project, asking you to forecast what you will do at each stage and how long it may take. While not always required, be sure to check the requirements of your project.

Here’s an example schedule to help you get started. You can also download a template at the button below.

Download our research schedule template

If you are applying for research funding, chances are you will have to include a detailed budget. This shows your estimates of how much each part of your project will cost.

Make sure to check what type of costs the funding body will agree to cover. For each item, include:

• Cost : exactly how much money do you need?
• Justification : why is this cost necessary to complete the research?
• Source : how did you calculate the amount?

To determine your budget, think about:

• Travel costs : do you need to go somewhere to collect your data? How will you get there, and how much time will you need? What will you do there (e.g., interviews, archival research)?
• Materials : do you need access to any tools or technologies?
• Help : do you need to hire any research assistants for the project? What will they do, and how much will you pay them?

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

Methodology

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

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

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

A PhD, which is short for philosophiae doctor (doctor of philosophy in Latin), is the highest university degree that can be obtained. In a PhD, students spend 3–5 years writing a dissertation , which aims to make a significant, original contribution to current knowledge.

A PhD is intended to prepare students for a career as a researcher, whether that be in academia, the public sector, or the private sector.

A master’s is a 1- or 2-year graduate degree that can prepare you for a variety of careers.

All master’s involve graduate-level coursework. Some are research-intensive and intend to prepare students for further study in a PhD; these usually require their students to write a master’s thesis . Others focus on professional training for a specific career.

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

The best way to remember the difference between a research plan and a research proposal is that they have fundamentally different audiences. A research plan helps you, the researcher, organize your thoughts. On the other hand, a dissertation proposal or research proposal aims to convince others (e.g., a supervisor, a funding body, or a dissertation committee) that your research topic is relevant and worthy of being conducted.

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. & George, T. (2023, November 21). How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved April 12, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-proposal/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

404 Not found

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

A New Chapter for Irish Historians’ ‘Saddest Book’

A globe-spanning research project has turned the catalog of a public archive destroyed in Ireland’s civil war into a model for reconstruction.

By Ed O’Loughlin

Reporting from Dublin

In the first pitched battle of the civil war that shaped a newly independent Ireland, seven centuries of history burned.

On June 30, 1922, forces for and against an accommodation with Britain, Ireland’s former colonial ruler, had been fighting for three days around Dublin’s main court complex. The national Public Record Office was part of the complex, and that day it was caught in a colossal explosion . The blast and the resulting fire destroyed state secrets, church records, property deeds, tax receipts, legal documents, financial data, census returns and much more, dating back to the Middle Ages.

“It was a catastrophe,” said Peter Crooks, a medieval historian at Trinity College Dublin. “This happened just after the First World War, when all over Europe new states like Ireland were emerging from old empires. They were all trying to recover and celebrate their own histories and cultures, and now Ireland had just lost the heart of its own.”

But perhaps it was not lost forever. Over the past seven years, a team of historians, librarians and computer experts based at Trinity has located duplicates for a quarter of a million pages of these lost records in forgotten volumes housed at far-flung libraries and archives, including several in the United States. The team then creates digital copies of any documents that it finds for inclusion in the Virtual Record Treasury of Ireland , an online reconstruction of the archive. Still a work in progress, the project says its website has had more than two million visits in less than two years.

Funded by the Irish government as part of its commemorations of a century of independence, the Virtual Treasury relies in part on modern technologies — virtual imaging, online networks, artificial intelligence language models and the growing digital indexes of archives around the world — but also on dusty printed catalogs and old-school human contacts. Key to the enterprise has been a book, “A Guide to the Records Deposited in the Public Record Office of Ireland,” published three years before the fire by the office’s head archivist, Herbert Wood.

“For a long time, Wood’s catalog was known to Irish historians as the saddest book in the world, because it only showed what was lost in the fire,” Dr. Crooks said. “But now it has become the basis for our model to recreate the national archive. There were 4,500 series of records listed in Wood’s book, and we went out to look for as many of them as we could find.”

A major partner in this hunt was the National Archives in Britain, to which centuries of Irish government records — notably tax receipts — had been sent in duplicate. The Public Record Office of Northern Ireland, which remains part of the United Kingdom, has also been a major partner, contributing records from the centuries before Ireland was partitioned in 1921.

A considerable haul of documents has also been uncovered in the United States. The Library of Congress, for example, dug up dozens of volumes of lost debates from Ireland’s 18th-century Parliament. According to David Brown, who leads the Virtual Treasury’s trawl through domestic and overseas archives, before this trove of political history came into Congress’s possession, one previous owner had tried to sell it as fuel. Serendipity has often played a role in such U.S. discoveries, he said.

“You would have old family records stored away in some gentleman’s library, and he’d move to the colonies, and take the books with him,” Dr. Brown said. “Or else heirs would eventually sell the old library off to collectors, and eventually an American university or library might buy the collection, maybe because they wanted something important in it, and they took everything else that came with it. Archivists may not always know what they have, but they never throw anything out.”

The Huntington Library in California, and libraries of the universities of Kansas, Chicago, Notre Dame, Yale and Harvard are among around a dozen U.S. organizations to respond positively to the hopeful request from the Irish: “Do you have anything there that might be of interest to us?” And in the process of hunting down material that is already on its radar, the Virtual Treasury team is also uncovering, and incorporating, unexpected treasures.

One is a previously unnoticed 1595 letter shown to Dr. Brown late last year while he was visiting Yale’s Lewis Walpole Library to view some other material. In it, Sir Ralph Lane — a founder and survivor of the infamous lost colony of Roanoke, off North Carolina, which had vanished in the decade before this letter was written — petitions Queen Elizabeth I to order the conquest of Ulster, then a Gaelic stronghold in the north of English-ruled Ireland.

Dr. Brown, a specialist in early modern Atlantic history, said the letter — long overlooked because it was bound in a volume with much later documents — showed the close connection between England’s colonial conquests in North America and Ireland, both in the personalities involved and their motivation. The letter suggests conquering Ulster primarily so that the English could seize the inhabitants’ land, and it proposes paying for the war by looting the Ulster chiefs’ cattle. The area was ultimately conquered and colonized in 1609, six years after Lane’s death.

“For the Elizabethan adventurers, colonialism was a branch of piracy. All they wanted was land,” Dr. Brown said. “Roanoke hadn’t worked out for Lane, and Elizabeth had just granted Sir Walter Raleigh 10,000 acres of land in Munster,” in the south of Ireland. “So Lane thought, if Raleigh got 10,000 acres in Munster, why can’t I have 10,000 acres in Ulster?”

Another contribution to the project could be seen in contemporary Northern Ireland, at the Public Record Office in Belfast. The head of conservation, Sarah Graham, was restoring and preserving a collection of records and letters kept by Archbishop John Swayne, who led the church in Ireland in the 15th century. Watching her at work was Lynn Kilgallon, research fellow in medieval history for the Virtual Treasury. Once preserved, its pages will be digitized and added to Dublin’s online archive.

“If you don’t understand the words in a book, it becomes just an object,” Ms. Graham said. “You need someone to read it — medievalists like Lynn here, to bring it to life.”

You do not necessarily need to be a specialist to read the documents in the Virtual Treasury, however. New artificial intelligence models developed for the project allow archivists to turn ancient handwriting into searchable digital text, with modern translations.

The site went online in June 2022, the 100th anniversary of the records office fire, and is aiming for 100 million searchable words by 2025, a target it says it is three-quarters of the way to reaching. Eventually, it hopes to recover 50 to 90 percent of records from some priority areas, such as censuses from before and after Ireland’s Great Famine in the mid-19th century, which are of particular value to historians, and to people of Irish descent tracing their roots. More than half of the details of the first nationwide census of Ireland, a religious head count in 1766, have been retrieved and published.

“Cultural loss is sadly a very prominent theme in the world right now, and I don’t think there is an example like this, where there’s been so much international cooperation in the reconstruction of a lost archive,” Dr. Crooks said. “It shows that the collective culture of many countries can be brought together to achieve a goal. Borders are fluid.”

Action Research in Agricultural Development Projects: Case Study of a Dairy Project in Ethiopia

• Open access
• Published: 13 April 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Augustine A. Ayantunde 1 ,
• Abule Ebro 1   nAff2 ,
• Tinsae Berhanu 1   nAff3 ,
• Demewez Moges 1   nAff3 &
• Jan van der Lee 1  

For development projects, an action research approach is often encouraged to enhance participation of end-users or beneficiaries at various stages of the project to realize the desired social transformation in the target communities. The project under consideration in this study adopted action research for some of its activities. A review of the project action research activities was conducted as part of the strategic reflection for lesson learning and to inform modification where necessary. The objectives of this study were (i) to assess the relevance of action research approach to implementation of project activities and, (ii) to draw lessons for agricultural development projects applying participatory approaches. Fifty-one participants involved in the project action research activities were interviewed on their understanding of action research, its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, and level of participation in action research activities. The perception of the participants interviewed regarding action research approach was that it is relevant and important for the project, and that it has provided a good platform for learning by all participants. Some key lessons from this study for development projects when applying action research approach include the need to focus on a limited number of issues or activities that can produce social transformation in the target communities, and the necessity of adequate planning for monitoring and documentation of learning by participants. From our study, action research is a pertinent approach in community development projects, but it should be well-planned to achieve the desired objective of social transformation in the target communities.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

In view of the action-oriented feature of action research and the necessity of participation of the potential beneficiaries for any development project to achieve social change in the target communities, a dairy project in Ethiopia entitled, “Building Rural Income through Inclusive Dairy Business Growth in Ethiopia” with the acronym “BRIDGE”, adopted action research as one of its main approaches. Action research approach was applied to the project components on forage development and feeding, dairy products marketing and value addition, and consumption of milk by school children. The project had a duration of 5 years (September 2018 – October 2023) with the overall goal of improved well-being for dairy farmer households and improved dairy sector performance in Ethiopia. By adopting an action research approach for the above-mentioned components, the emphasis of the project is on co-learning, capacity building and empowerment of the target communities. This implies that issues being addressed by the project come from and are of importance to the target communities.

Action research as a methodology can be applied in many contexts, such as community development, professional education, health education, organizational transformation, biodiversity conservation, and agricultural development (McNiff 2013 ; Reason and Bradbury 2008 ). For development projects, an action research approach is often encouraged to enhance participation of end-users or beneficiaries at various stages of the project (planning, implementation, evaluation and closure) to realize the desired social transformation in the target communities (Aragón and Glenzer 2017 ). Besides, action research is commonly advocated to ensure the integration of the knowledge and expertise of community members into local development projects (Kindon et al. 2007 ) based on the epistemological premise of existence of plurality of knowledge in a variety of institutions and locations. Applying an action research approach also ensures focus on the pursuit of practical issues that are of concern to the project target communities (Kindon et al. 2007 ).

Since the 1990s, action research has been on the rise as a leading paradigm within the social and environmental sciences to promote participation and working together of different stakeholders (McNiff 2013 ). In sub-Saharan African contexts, action research has been applied to various projects, such as a soil fertility management project in Tanzania (Mponela et al. 2023 ) as an approach to foster transformation of knowledge systems and learning among smallholder farmers; a tourism development project in Kenya as a vehicle to engage people in interactive learning processes to facilitate individual and societal change (Jernsand 2017 ); and a project on local forms of child protection in Ethiopia to reflect on the learnings from women in Ethiopia’s Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples (SNNP) region (Lackovich-Van Gorp 2017 ; Martinez 2017 ). Rasheli ( 2017 ) also reported using an action research approach to address problems related to procurement management in two local government authorities in Tanzania, while Omondi ( 2020 ) highlighted the potential presented by participatory rural appraisal techniques, an offshoot of action research, to enhance collaborative learning and improve community knowledge for climate change adaptation in Kenya. Action research approach was also used in projects on AIDS prevention among school youth in Jinja, Uganda (Walakira 2010 ) and in Kajiado, Kenya (Ahlberg et al. 2016 ). Isobell et al. ( 2016 ) also reported using participatory action research in two community-based projects on violence prevention and peace promotion in South Africa. These publications show the relevance of action research to different research and development projects in sub-Saharan Africa, its action-oriented feature, and the broad contexts it can be applied to (Brydon-Miller et al. 2003 ). The guiding principles for action research in these development projects include inclusivity of relevant stakeholders, joint ownership of co-produced knowledge, participatory planning and effective facilitation of the action research process (Khan et al. 2013 ).

In this paper, action research is used as a family of approaches that pursue both action and research outcomes as reported by some authors (Brydon-Miller et al. 2003 ; Reason and Bradbury 2008 ; Beylefeld 2010 ; McNiff 2013 ). This implies that action research covers different hybrid approaches that have emerged in the past two decades including participative action research, practitioner action research, collaborative action research, participatory learning and action, and emancipatory action research (Kindon et al. 2007 ; McNiff 2013 ; Fahy 2015 ). Differences among these approaches are largely based on different level of commitment and influence of participants, and in the research process (Fahy 2015 ). Some similarities among these approaches are active participation, open-ended objectives, and commitment from the researchers and the participants to the research problem and active learning (Fahy 2015 ). In addition, it can be argued that the above mentioned action research hybrid approaches are part of a continuum of naturalistic, post-positivist, and systemic research methodology (McNiff 2013 ). This position of seeing action research as a family of approaches is consistent with the trend of many action researchers who are increasingly focusing on the points of convergence of these approaches (Fahy 2015 ). Regarding the emergence of different action research hybrid approaches, McNiff ( 2013 ) raised concern on an increasing tendency to compartmentalise action research with the perhaps inevitable consequences of territorialism. The associated danger with this, according to the author, is “losing touch with the voices of people in the streets and workplaces, which is what action research should be all about”. In the context of the BRIDGE project, action research approach is applied based on the principles of participation, inclusion and shared learning to enhance collaboration, empower participants, advance knowledge acquisition, and social change (Fahy 2015 ).

As reflection is a key and distinctive element of action research (McNiff 2013 ), a review of the BRIDGE project action research activities was conducted as part of the strategic reflection to inform lesson learning, modification or redesign of participatory action research approaches where necessary, and to facilitate proper alignment of the action research to the project implementation. The review of the action research activities of BRIDGE forms the core of this paper. The objectives of this study were to: (i) Assess the relevance of the action research approach to implementation of BRIDGE project activities by identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the various action research approaches applied. (ii) To draw lessons from this case study for agricultural development projects applying the action research approach, based on its strengths and weaknesses. In addition, the present study aims at contributing to the limited literature about perception of participants on action research (Niyobuhungiro and Schenck 2022 ) with focus on agricultural development projects in sub-Saharan Africa.

Methodology

Action research approach as applied by bridge.

The action research approach as applied by BRIDGE followed the classic cycle of action to reflection as articulated by Lewin ( 1946 ), which entails a cycle of planning, acting, observing and reflecting. The action research process followed by the project for some specific activities listed in Table  1 is presented in Fig.  1 . In addition to the action research approach, the BRIDGE project also used value chain development approach to strengthen the nodes in the dairy value chain, a pluriform extension approach involving both public and private extension services for engagement with dairy farmers, and policy dialogue and influencing approach for engagement with policy makers.

Action research cycle as applied to BRIDGE project activities

As presented in Fig.  1 , the action research process of the BRIDGE project began with the planning phase, which entailed stakeholders’ meetings involving development practitioners, extension services at district and regional levels, researchers, partners from Ethiopian universities and research institutes in the project areas, dairy farmers, and agro-input dealers to explain the overall goal of the project and to conduct participatory situation analysis regarding dairy production in the project areas. This phase led to joint identification of key issues for the project to focus on regarding feed and forage, silage making, access to forage seed, milk collection, conservation and consumption, milk quality and safety, and input and output markets. For some of these activities, there was participatory design of the on-farm demonstration trials, for example improved forage cultivation.

The acting phase focused on implementation of the jointly agreed activities to address the key issues identified in the planning phase, such as training of the farmers on planting of the improved forage seed, on-farm demonstration of improved forage species, and interviewing of the participating farmers. In addition, assessments or studies were conducted on some jointly identified key issues, such as milk quality along the value chain, milk cooling facilities, and a consumer insight study on the potential of probiotic yoghurt. The observing phase involved monitoring of the activities being implemented, including data collection and analysis, and organization of the farmers’ field day and visits to show the improved forage demonstration plots to a wide array of stakeholders. The reflecting phase entailed reporting, sharing and disseminating main findings from the action research activities, and revisiting certain activities. Learning by the stakeholders occurred at all phases of the action research cycle. The project activities to which the action research approach was applied are presented in Table  1 .

Conceptual Framework of the Study

As part of the reflection on the BRIDGE action research activities, a review was conducted between October and December 2022 by the first author who was new to the project to ensure a non-biased investigation. This was necessary to ensure validity and reliability of the findings about the action research activities. The review started with the planning phase, which included reading of the relevant project documents and publications on action research, particularly in the context of development projects (Table  2 ). This was followed by development of terms of reference for the review and drafting of guide questions for the interviewing of project participants. The investigating phase of the study consisted largely of individual interviews of the project participants and field visits to project sites in Oromia and Amhara regions of Ethiopia. Fifty-one participants were interviewed consisting of project staff, government extension officials, Ethiopian university partners, dairy cooperative members, agro-input dealers and dairy farmers (Table  3 ).

The participants who were interviewed had varied professional backgrounds, such as research, project management, advisory service, commerce, and mixed crop-livestock farming. The interview was semi-structured based on guide questions that were developed in advance (Table  4 ). Some of the questions asked focused on description of the action research, activities conducted using an action research approach, the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of different participatory action research techniques, and lessons learnt from application of action research. Notes were taken during the interviews and pictures were taken during the field visits. For the farmers and dairy cooperatives, the questions focused mainly on their perception of the benefits and disadvantages of using an action research approach for the implementation of certain project activities. The analysis phase entailed reviewing the notes taken and seeking clarifications where necessary, and analysis of data collected. The last phase of the review was to draft a report and share the main findings through a presentation and discussion. Recommendations from the review were also shared with the BRIDGE project management.

Results and Discussion

Description of action research by the interviewees.

As action research tends to be defined differently based on the discipline of the individual (Reason and Bradbury 2008 ), the individual interview started by asking the respondent’s understanding of action research. From the discussions with BRIDGE project staff and partners, action research was described as follows:

A research conducted involving the end-users with purpose of providing practical information for implementation of project activities.

The emphasis from this description is on participation of the end-users in implementation of research activities. As participation of different stakeholders is a critical element of action research, this description is consistent with definitions in the literature by McNiff ( 2013 ), and Lebesby and Benders ( 2020 ). Participation of different stakeholders is necessary in giving voice to the end-users and to enhance ownership of both the process and the outcomes (Loo 2014 ; Schulz et al. 2021 ). In stressing the importance of participation in action research, Brydon-Miller et al. ( 2003 ) observed that research conducted without a collaborative relationship with the relevant stakeholders is likely to be incompetent. Another key point from this definition by the project participants is action, that the research should be action-oriented to address practical issues of importance to the stakeholders. This is consistent with one of the tenets of action research, that is, it is research that leads to action (practice) and effects change or leads to innovation (Brydon-Miller et al. 2003 ). The “action” in “action research” is critical to testing knowledge in action or putting theory into practice (Brydon-Miller et al. 2003 ). The action to be undertaken by the relevant stakeholders may be both remedial and developmental (Kenefick and Kirrane 2022 ).

Action research is a learning platform to inform implementation or specific action by the stakeholders.

The emphasis of this description of action research is on learning that takes place along the action research cycle. This learning is by all stakeholders including researchers. The emphasis on learning in this description by the BRIDGE participants is consistent with observations in the literature on action research that learning is a fundamental element (McNiff 2013 ; Kindon et al. 2007 ). With involvement of different participants in a project, diverse opportunities for learning exist through interactions among the stakeholders, based on the premise that multiple types knowledge are available. This implies that researchers are not the only source of knowledge in action research. In BRIDGE, the researchers in the team brought their technical or propositional knowledge to action research activities, such as knowledge on forage agronomy for cultivation of improved forage species, feed resource management and ration formulation for silage making, knowledge on post-harvest management for milk conservation and processing, and knowledge on human nutrition for the school milk programme. The extension services used their practical knowledge on improved dairy husbandry, particularly on forage cultivation and feed conservation, to translate research findings into extension messages for dairy farmers. The indigenous knowledge of dairy farmers was useful in joint identification of constraints to dairy production in their communities and strategies to address the problems, like use of locally available feed resources. The dairy farmers also contributed to action research on crop residue treatment through use of locally available tools for physical treatment of crop residues. In addition, the farmers used their local knowledge in identification of a local brewery by-product called “atela” as a source of fermenting sugar for silage making instead of molasses which has become expensive and unavailable. So, different kinds of knowledge are used in BRIDGE with emphasis on transformation knowledge which produces practical solutions to the pressing concerns of the people (Brydon-Miller et al. 2003 ). For co-learning to take place, it is therefore necessary that issues that need to be addressed are jointly identified and co-implemented by all stakeholders, rather than being imposed by the researchers as in conventional research. In support of the “action” in action research, one of the respondents observed that: “There is a research fatigue among farmers, where researchers just come to collect data and disappear. Hence, there is need for research that translates into practical action, thereby contributing to improvement of the livelihood of farmers.” (Respondent PS 5).

From the above descriptions, it is obvious that many of the BRIDGE staff and partners have a good understanding of the action research approach, although the emphasis may differ from joint planning to participatory learning. This is not surprising, as development assistance agencies and non-governmental organizations have been good at applying the values and practices of action research to development projects, though they may not be able to articulate quite well the underlying theories, as observed by Mead ( 2002 ). One important element of action research that was missing from above descriptions is that of reflection, which may suggest that the reflection part of action research was weak in the action research activities of the project. From the discussion on the general understanding of the action research approach by the respondents, the most frequent keywords or phrases used were “learning platform”, “co-implementation”, and “technology demonstration” (Fig.  2 .). Action research was also described as a linkage between research and extension. Again in the keywords/phrases used, there was nothing on reflection or participatory evaluation. This is not unexpected for a development project, where project monitoring and evaluation is often top-down and extractive. In this regard, participatory evaluation may not be included as element of action research activities.

Perception of Action Research Approach by the Participants

The perception of the respondents regarding the action research approach of the project in our study was that it is relevant and important for implementation of project activities. It was also observed by most respondents that some of the action research activities are visible and widely adopted by farmers, for example, forage cultivation and silage making. Another impression of the action research approach was that it has brought different disciplines together to work on project activities. One of the respondents put this clearly: “Action research has removed working in silos and has bridged the disciplinary gap in the project” (Respondent PS 2). This observation is consistent with the interdisciplinary nature of action research (Brydon-Miller 2003).

Key words or phrases used in describing action research by the respondents

Another common observation by the respondents was that action research has provided a good platform for learning by BRIDGE project staff, university partners, extension services and farmers. Through BRIDGE action research activities, knowledge was generated through processes of observation, inquiry, reflection and engagement by the participants. For example, through participants’ observation of and inquiry on improved forage demonstration plots, the dairy farmers learnt agronomic practices on cultivation of forage species which led to establishment of their own forage plots to address the problem of feed scarcity for their cows. Through demonstration of how to make silage, the farmers not only gained knowledge on how to make silage, but also learnt how to substitute molasses, the fermenting sugar for silage, with a local brewery by-product called “atela”. From the assessment of school milk programme, results showed that parents’ attitude towards consumption of dairy products changed positively within 6 months when they learnt about benefits of milk consumption to children and saw the effects on their children. For example, a parent said: “My daughter’s appetite for dairy products was very low, and we believed that milk would make her feel sick, but this was not the case when she joined the school milk programme. In fact, my daughter’s health has improved, her skin and hair are shining, and she has a lot more energy. Her performance at school has also improved” (Respondent PP6). The participants from extension service also reported that they have learnt skills on how to facilitate group discussion and collective action by the community through action research on improved forage cultivation. The researchers also gained knowledge on farmers’ innovation in forage cultivation. For example, in addition to technical advice from the researchers and extension service on forage cultivation, the farmers modified the guidelines by planting fruit trees, particularly avocado and vegetables (for example, hot pepper), along with the improved forage in one of the project locations in Amhara region. The rationale for this was to optimize land use (which is scarce), thereby maximizing returns, according to the farmers interviewed.

The observation that action research has provided a platform for learning is consistent with one of the descriptions of action research presented above. Nearly all the external partners of BRIDGE who were interviewed, acknowledged that they learnt about an action research approach for the first time through the project. One of the project partners said that: “Action research has put focus on research that addresses practical issues of the dairy farmers” (Respondent PP 5). This observation again re-emphasizes the “action” pillar of action research, as it is not a basic theoretical research, but applied, with focus on practical issues. In this regard, the action research activities in BRIDGE focused on addressing constraints to dairy production in the project locations. For example, the action research on forage cultivation, silage making and crop residue treatment was to address problem of feed scarcity for dairy cows. The school milk programme was in line with the Ethiopian Government policy on human nutrition to reduce malnutrition among children due to low consumption of animal source protein. The assessment of milk cooling facilities addressed the challenge of post-harvest losses through poor conservation of fresh milk. However, by focusing on practical issues affecting the target communities there is the danger that action research may become “all action” and “no research”, especially when applied to development projects. So, it is important that action research practices should be informed by theory (Reason and Bradbury 2008 ).

The perception of the participants that BRIDGE action research activities provide a good platform for learning, bridges disciplinary gaps and puts a focus on the practical issues affecting the participants is consistent with reported findings from applying an action research approach to development projects in sub-Saharan Africa (Wood and Govender 2013 ; Niyobuhungiro and Schenck 2022 ; Pittalis et al. 2023 ). Wood and Govender ( 2013 ) observed that there is learning through the action research process, as already discussed above. According to Pittalis et al. ( 2023 ), feedback from the action research participants based on their perception could provide support for the design of a locally relevant and contextualized intervention. In addition, this can contribute to co-development of knowledge, which requires collaboration of different groups of stakeholders, and this gives voice to the concerned communities on issues that affect them. However, the challenge from making use of the perception on action research of the participants is that there can be differences in the way individuals interpret and understand action research process, which may sometimes be difficult to synthesize for action planning for contextualized intervention (Niyobuhungiro and Schenck 2022 ).

Common Action Research Methods Used by BRIDGE

The most common methods or techniques used in action research activities by BRIDGE were Farmers’ Field Days (FFDs), on-farm demonstrations, and training (Fig.  3 ). FFDs and demonstrations were commonly used for cultivation of improved forage varieties and silage making in all the four project clusters. The Farmers’ Field Days and on-farm demonstrations for forage cultivation were based on four to eight forage plots of 0.25 ha each per project community, established and managed by dairy farmers with advisory support from extension service to serve as a learning platform for other farmers. Through these FFDs and on-farm demonstrations, improved forage species such as Napier grass, Desho grass, Panicum, oat, vetch and alfalfa have been cultivated on 4,733 ha of land by about 35,000 dairy farmers as at the end of 2022 in Amhara, Oromia, and Sidama regions of Ethiopia where BRIDGE activities were carried out, according to the project 2022 annual report (Unpublished). These techniques have been reported as common elements of participatory action research (Kindon et al. 2007 ) and they may enhance co-production of knowledge according to Omondi ( 2020 ). Other action research methods used by the project included training on different project related subjects, farmer to farmer learning, and campaigns, for example on milk safety. The least common techniques used in action research activities were laboratory analysis for feed and milk, rapid field tests for milk adulteration, and on-farm experimentation. Some of these methods are context-specific, such as campaign on milk safety, rapid field testing of milk quality, messaging to farmers, and sharing of extension packages, while others included adaptation of traditional social science methods like interviewing and surveying.

Common action research methods used by the project

Participation in BRIDGE Action Research Activities by Stakeholders

Participation at all stages is fundamental for any action research project, as this is essential for fostering learning and achieving social transformation (Omondi 2020 ). Using the participation continuum proposed by Pretty et al. ( 1995 ), different action research activities by the BRIDGE project were mapped (Fig.  4 ). Another conceptual framework for participation that could be used in this study is the “ladder of stakeholder participation” developed by Arnstein ( 1969 ) based on examples from three US Federal social programmes for citizens. We used the participation continuum by Pretty et al. ( 1995 ), as it is more suitable for action research in development projects. As expected, the level of participation by different stakeholders varied for different action research activities. The level of participation ranged from passive participation for on-farm experimentation on crop residue treatment to self-mobilization for improved forage cultivation and silage making, which dairy farmers adopted and carried out on their own. The high degree of participation in forage cultivation and silage making shows that when the benefit to stakeholders, in this case dairy farmers, is obvious and immediate, the level of participation in action research can be high.

Participation continuum of project action research activities

For meaningful and effective participation in action research activities, Kindon et al. ( 2007 ) proposed three core ethical principles to be adhered to, namely respect for participants, beneficence, and justice or equity. Respect for participants implies that people are treated as autonomous agents and that vulnerable participants are protected. Participation should not lead to domination by the community elites or to reinforcement of the pre-existing power hierarchies, which has not been beneficial to the community (Kindon et al. 2007 ). For many development projects, this is always a challenge, i.e., how to handle the existing power hierarchies in the community to prevent domination by the elites (Aragón and Glenzer 2017 ). The principle of beneficence, according to Kindon et al. ( 2007 ), should go beyond ‘doing no harm’, but maximize beneficial outcomes for participants and the community. Action research activities by BRIDGE, such as forage cultivation and silage making, were beneficial to dairy farmers in the project sites, as these led to significant increase in milk yield and consequently household income. The respondents also observed that the level of participation varied at different stages of the action research cycle for the project activities. For example, co-implementation of the action research activities generally tended to involve more and diverse participants, whereas design of specific interventions from jointly identified problem(s) tended to have fewer participants. The danger inherent in a low level of participation at any stage of the action research cycle is retention of researchers’ control, which can adversely affect ownership of the process and the outcomes (Brydon-Miller et al. 2003 ).

To ensure effective participation of stakeholders in environmental management, Reed ( 2008 ) proposed eight best practices, which are also valid for stakeholder participation in action research. These best practices include having an underpinning philosophy of participation that emphasizes empowerment, equity, trust and learning; embedding participation in the action research activities right from the onset, adequate representation of different groups of relevant stakeholders, and having clear objectives for the participatory process. Other best practices according to Reed ( 2008 ) are appropriate methods tailored to the local context, effective facilitation, integration of local and scientific knowledge, and institutionalization of participation. These best practices were applied to BRIDGE action research activities, though to a varying degree. For example, all relevant groups of stakeholders were adequately represented in BRIDGE action research activities (see Fig.  5 . with a picture of participants at Farmers’ Field Day) and the methods were tailored to the local context. However, the institutionalization of participation needs to be strengthened.

Farmers’ Field days on improved forage at Mecha, West Gojam district, Amhara Region, Ethiopia (Photo credit: Abule Ebro)

SWOT Analysis of BRIDGE Action Research Activities

The action research activities covered in this SWOT analysis included forage cultivation, silage making, crop residue treatment, design of milk quality and safety programme, assessment of milk cooling facilities, assessment of dairy farm benchmarking, assessment of forage seed smart subsidy model, school milk programme, and consumer insight study on the potential of probiotic yoghurt (Table  5 ). Again, the common strength of the action research approach as mentioned by the interviewees for these activities was that of providing a platform for learning by different stakeholders. Learning by all participants in action research activities is essential for knowledge development, which could lead to purposeful individual and community action for socio-economic transformation (McNiff 2013 ). Lebesby and Benders ( 2020 ) observed that the primary purpose of action research is to produce practical knowledge for everyday life of the participants. The importance of learning by participants through action research was also reported by Omondi ( 2020 ) as essential for co-production of knowledge on climate change adaptation in the Mara River Basin in Kenya. The other reported strengths of BRIDGE action research activities were activity-specific. For example, strong participation was reported as one of the strengths of action research activities for forage cultivation and silage making (Table  5 ). This suggests that the degree of participation in an action research project or activity depends on its type or nature, potential benefit and cost, and socio-cultural contexts (Kindon et al. 2007 ).

The common weakness of BRIDGE action research activities mentioned by the respondents was the absence of systematic monitoring and documentation of learning by participants (Table  5 ). The challenge with such monitoring and documentation is a common issue when action research activities are led by researchers whose preoccupation about data collection is on technical parameters at the expense of collecting data on processes. Omondi ( 2020 ) observed this challenge in her study that most researchers may not be familiar with the elements of self-critique and reflection, which are fundamental for monitoring and documentation of learning while collecting data in an action research project. In addressing this challenge of the competence of researchers in conducting action research, Brydon-Miller et al. ( 2003 ) suggested that there should be changes in researchers’ practices. For example, the traditional epistemological methods of research, which tend to be extractive in nature, may be inadequate to capture the processes of learning by participants in an action research project. Other reported weaknesses of BRIDGE action research activities tended to be activity-specific.

Some opportunities of using an action research approach for the BRIDGE project activities, as reported by the respondents, included enhancement of farmers’ innovation, awareness raising, and strong interest in the action research approach by public extension services and research partners. The project research partners acknowledged during the interview that they learnt about action research through the project and that their capacity in participatory action research techniques has been enhanced. This response by project partners on enhanced capacity is consistent with the observation by McNiff ( 2013 ) that action research projects often leave behind enhanced capacities of the participants in view of the emphasis on collaboration and learning. The enhancement of farmers’ innovation through participatory action research reported by the respondents has also been reported by Mponela et al. ( 2023 ) for a project on soil fertility management in Tanzania. For example in BRIDGE, farmers’ innovations in forage cultivation included planting of fruit trees and vegetables along with improved forage cultivars on the demonstration plot. According to the farmers, these innovations were to optimize land use in view of land shortage. In general, opportunities of action research activities were also activity-specific.

The main threat to action research activities by the project as reported by the respondents is government policy, particularly on land use, which generally tends to favour crop farming. This can undermine forage cultivation. One of the participants put it clearly: “Government officials see the grazing land for livestock as a waste, especially near Addis Ababa, the capital, and would rather prefer that it is used for cropping” (Respondent PS 6). The increasing competition for land is driven partly by demographic pressure, leading to expansion of crop fields into grazing areas in order to produce more food to feed the rapidly growing population (Balehegn et al. 2020 ). Other threats mentioned by the respondents were specific to different action research activities. For example, the reported potential threats to the school milk programme were volatility of price and quality of milk supplied to the school.

The results of the SWOT analysis of the action research activities of BRIDGE are generally as expected for a development project. Maximizing the strengths, minimizing the weaknesses and utilizing the opportunities of these action research activities are critical to social transformation and developmental changes in the project target communities. Generally, these results on strengths and weaknesses of, and opportunities and threats for action research as applied by BRIDGE are context-specific, depending on the activity and location. These findings are consistent with the observation of Brydon-Miller (2003) that one of the weaknesses of action research is its localism, which makes it difficult in intervening in large-scale social change efforts. This implies that action research may produce a great good in a local situation, but may sometimes be difficult to extend beyond that local context. To enhance scaling of action research, a good documentation of the processes and the outcomes of action research activities is indispensable. Martin ( 2008 ) opined that two key challenges to be addressed to apply action research on a larger scale are sensemaking of the suitability to the project or project activities, and project design and implementation processes. For sensemaking, Martin ( 2008 ) proposed a number of questions to address, such as: Who are the players? Where is the power? What will motivate the larger public to take interest in any change? The author further elaborated on the second challenge that the design and implementation processes should allow for engagement of multiple perspectives and support inquiry and learning. For large development projects applying action research, these two challenges enumerated by Martin ( 2008 ) must be adequately addressed.

Lessons for Applying Action Research Approach to Agricultural Development Projects

Generally, the use of an action research approach by BRIDGE has contributed significantly to implementation of some project activities and has produced visible results, which are widely appreciated and adopted. These include for example cultivation of improved forage varieties and silage making. However, there was the impression from some of the respondents that the action research activities by the project are rather many, and that there should be focus on fewer key issues or activities that can produce social transformation in the target communities. Given that the action research approach can be applied to a wide array of issues and fields, the danger is always that it may be applied even where other research methods may be more suitable. The romanticization of action research as a participatory approach may lead to de-legitimization of other research methods that are not participatory, which is one of the criticisms of action research (Kindon et al. 2007 ). On the issue of suitability of an action research approach to different project issues, one of the interviewees said: “Action research is suitable in addressing practical issues at farm and community levels, but at higher scale (regional, national) another approach is needed” (Respondent PS 7). For community development projects where stakeholders’ participation is paramount, action research is not only relevant, but necessary to achieve the desired goal of community empowerment and social change. However, when it comes to issues such as policy dialogue and influencing, and development planning, other approaches may be necessary, as these require data aggregation at higher levels.

Action research requires patience from the researchers and other participants as it often takes significant time (Kindon et al. 2007 ). This was pointed out by some of the respondents during the interview. One of them said: “Action research activities tend to take too much time as the pace of implementation is slow” (Respondent PS 3). One of the interviewees asked rhetorically: “When do we exit the action research cycle as we cannot continue in the cycle perpetually?” (Respondent PP 4). This observation underscores the importance of a clear exit strategy for action research activities. Though the need for participation of all relevant stakeholders in action research activities is obvious, there should be some guiding rules or principles for stakeholders’ participation to avoid a tedious travelling through a winding alley during the action research process. This raises the need for necessary skills by the facilitators of the action research activities to achieve the jointly pre-defined objectives within the stipulated time. The length of time for action research activities should also be aligned with the project duration.

Another lesson from this study is the necessity of keeping focus on the bigger picture of the project. Following an action research approach may sometimes lead to new cycles of activities, which in principle is good, but has the danger that multiplied activities can lead to loss of focus on the bigger picture of the project. For example, in our study action research activities on farm-level demonstrations of improved forage cultivation may be difficult to communicate in terms of the bigger picture of dairy sector transformation in Ethiopia for the BRIDGE project. The need for focus on the bigger picture of the project necessitates prioritization of action research activities, as this will facilitate communication with policy makers.

As part of lesson learning from this study, it is important to emphasize the need for adequate planning for monitoring and documentation of learning from the action research activities. It should be clarified that monitoring of learning by the action research participants is not the same as monitoring or tracking progress of the project activities in relation to the defined milestones, which is often well-planned by the project management. Generally, the development agencies and non-governmental organizations are good in the conventional monitoring and evaluation in the context of project performance-based accountability in response to growing demand by donors for demonstrated success of development projects (Estrella and Gaventa 1998 ). The focus here is on monitoring and systematic documentation of learning at different phases of action research cycle, for example farmers’ innovations to introduced technology. This monitoring and documentation of learning is one of the major weaknesses reported by the respondents in this study. Therefore, there should be a clear plan right from the onset of the action research on how to monitor and document learning by the participants, as this is necessary for critical reflection and participatory evaluation of the activities being carried out. Lack of documentation of learning during the different phases of action research cycle can be an obstacle to innovative and wider use of all that action research can offer (Kindon et al. 2007 ). To aid planning of monitoring and documentation of learning, a few guide questions should be addressed. First, what monitoring and learning activities should be done? Second, who should do what? Third, how should it be done? Fourth, when should it be done? Fifth, how much will it cost per activity? Besides, participatory monitoring and evaluation of action research activities is necessary to enhance participation of stakeholders, to share experience among the stakeholders through systematic documentation of processes and outcomes, and to empower the local people to initiate, control and take collective action (Estrella and Gaventa 1998 ; Dodd et al. 2023 ). Dodd et al. ( 2023 ) suggested that participatory monitoring and evaluation should be built on the foundational elements of local cultures and trust-based relationships among the stakeholders.

For many development projects in sub-Saharan Africa, action research activities are donor-driven and often face funding problems at the expiration of the project (Isobell et al. 2016 ). Therefore, building capacity of key stakeholders in participatory action research approaches is necessary to be able to continue with essential activities in the target communities after the end of the project, and it is a form of empowering them which will facilitate institutionalization of the action research approach. The capacity building should include both the theory and practice of action research; it is important that the trainees have a conceptual understanding of action research, so that activities are not carried out haphazardly (Khan et al. 2013 ).

From the results of this study, our advice for developing similar action research projects is that there should be a good planning to ensure having right mix of stakeholders and for effective implementation of action research activities to achieve the objective of social transformation in the target communities. A clear exit strategy for action research activities, adequate budgeting as well as ensuring that the activities are informed by theory, should be part of the planning. However, there should be room for flexibility to adapt the plan to accommodate necessary emerging issues in the course of project implementation.

For development projects, an action research approach is often encouraged to enhance participation of end-users or beneficiaries at various stages of the project, and participatory learning and co-production of knowledge to realize the desired social changes in the target communities. In this regard, the project under consideration in this study adopted action research for some of its activities. The perception of the participants interviewed regarding the action research approach under the project was that it is relevant and important for implementation of project activities. Besides, the respondents reported that the action research approach has brought different disciplines together to work on project activities and that it has provided a good platform for learning by project staff, university partners, extension services, and farmers. Other strengths of action research reported by the respondents were activity-specific. The major weakness of action research as applied by the project is absence of systematic monitoring and documentation of learning by participants at all stages of the action research cycle. Some opportunities of using an action research approach for the BRIDGE project activities, as reported by the respondents, included enhancement of farmers’ innovations, awareness raising, and strong interest in action research approach by public extension services and research partners. Some key lessons from this study for development projects for applying an action research approach include: the need for focus on a few key issues and/or on activities that can produce desired socio-economic changes in the target communities; the importance of a clear exit strategy for action research activities to avoid a non-ending cycle of activities; the necessity of staying focused on the bigger picture of the project; the need for adequate planning for monitoring and documentation of learning from the action research activities; and building capacity of key local stakeholders in action research to ensure sustainability of project interventions. Action research is a pertinent approach in community development projects, but it should be well planned to ensure effective implementation to achieve the objective of social transformation in the target communities.

Data Availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, Ayantunde, upon reasonable request.

Ahlberg BM, Maina F, Kubai A, Khamasi W, Ekman M, Lundqvist-Persson C (2016) ‘A child, a tree’’: challenges in building collaborative relations in a community research project in a Kenyan context. Action Res 14:257–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750315607607

Article   Google Scholar  

Aragón AO, Glenzer K (2017) Untaming aid through action research: seeking transformative reflective action. Action Res 15:3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750317700253

Arnstein SR (1969) A ladder of participation. J Amer Inst Planners 35:216–224

Balehegn M, Duncan A, Tolera A, Ayantunde AA, Issa S, Karimou M, Zampaligré N, André K, Gnanda I, Varijakshapanicker P, Kebreab E, Dubeux J, Boote K, Minta M, Feyissa F, Adesogan AT (2020) Improving adoption of technologies and interventions for increasing supply of quality livestock feed in low-and middle-income countries. Glob Food Secur 26:100372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100372

Beylefeld AA (2010) The challenge of creating knowledge through action research. South Afr J High Edu 19:1321–1333. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajhe.v19i7.50235

Brydon-Miller M, Greenwood D, Maguire P (2003) Why action research? Action Res 1:9–28

Dodd W, Wyngaarden S, Humphries S, Lobo Tosta E, Portillo VZ, Orellana P (2023) How long-term emancipatory programming facilitates participatory evaluation: building a methodology of participation through research with youth in Honduras. Action Res 0:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/14767503231160960

Estrella M, Gaventa J (1998) Who counts reality? Participatory monitoring and evaluation: A literature review. IDS Working Paper 70. Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK

Fahy F (2015) Participatory Action Research in Environmental and Ecological Studies. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), p 535–539

Isobell D, Lazarus S, Suffla S, Seedat M (2016) Research translation through participatory research: the case of two community-based projects in low-income African settings. Action Res 14:393–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750315626779

Jernsand EM (2017) Engagement as transformation: Learnings from a tourism development project in Dunga by Lake Victoria, Kenya. Action Res 15:81–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750316678913

Kenefick D, Kirrane M (2022) A little less conversation, a little more action: participatory insider action research in an executive team. Syst Pract Act Res 35:453–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-021-09580-x

Khan KS, Bawani SAA, Aziz A (2013) Bridging the gap of knowledge and action: a case for participatory action research. Action Res 11:157–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750313477158

Kindon S, Pain R, Kesby M (2007) Participatory action research approaches and methods: connecting people, participation and place. Routledge – Taylor & Francis group, London, UK; New York, USA

Book   Google Scholar  

Lackovich-Van Gorp A (2017) Unearthing local forms of child protection: positive deviance and abduction in Ethiopia. Action Res 15:39–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750316679240

Lebesby K, Benders J (2020) Too smart to participate? Rational reasons for employees’ non-participation in action research. Syst Pract Act Res 33:625–638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-020-09538-5

Lewin K (1946) Action research and minority problems. J Soc Issues 2:34–46

Loo C (2014) The role of community participation in climate change assessment and research. J Agr Environ Ethic 271:65–85

Martin AW (2008) Action research on a larger scale: Issues and practices. In: Reason and Bradbury (eds.), Action research: Participative inquire and practice. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, USA; London, UK. Pages 394–406

Martinez E (2017) Invisible in plain sight: a reflection on the potential and perils of an action research study of ‘‘positive deviants’’. Action Res 15:53–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750317700477

McNiff J (2013) Action research – Principles and practice. Third edition. Routledge – Taylor & Francis group, London, UK; New York, USA

Mead G (2002) Developing ourselves as police leaders: how can we inquire collaboratively in a hierarchical organizations. Syst Pract Act Res 15:191–206

Mponela P, Manda J, Kinyua M, Kihara J (2023) Participatory action research, social networks, and gender influence soil fertility management in Tanzania. Syst Pract Act Res 36:141–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-022-09601-3

Niyobuhungiro RV, Schenck C (2022) Exploring community perceptions of illegal dumping in Fisantekraal using participatory action research. South Afr J Sci 118:33–39. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2022/12563

Omondi LA (2020) Learning together: participatory rural appraisal for coproduction of climate change knowledge. Action Res 0:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750320905901

Pittalis C, Drury G, Mwapasa G, Borgstein E, Cheelo M, Kachimba J, Juma A, Chilonga K, Cahill N, Brugha R, Lavy C, Gajewski J (2023) Using participatory action research to empower district hospital staff to deliver quality-assured essential surgery to rural populations in Malawi, Zambia, and Tanzania. Front Pub Health 11:1186307. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1186307

Pretty J, Guijt I, Thompson J, Scoones J (1995) Participatory learning and action: a trainer’s guide. International Institute for Environment and Development, London, UK

Google Scholar  

Rasheli GA (2017) Action research in procurement management; evidence from selected lower local government authorities in Tanzania. Action Res 15:373–385. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750316653813

Reason P, Bradbury H (2008) The SAGE handbook of action research – participative inquiry and practice. SAGE, Los Angeles, USA; London, UK

Reed MS (2008) Stakeholder participation for Environmental Management: A literature review. Biol Conserv 141:2417–2431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014

Schulz R, Sense A, Pepper M (2021) Combining participative action research with an adapted house of quality framework for the stakeholder development of performance indicators in local government. Syst Pract Act Res 34:307–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-020-09534-9

Walakira EJ (2010) Reflective learning in action research: a case of micro-interventions for HIV prevention among the youth in Kakira-Kabembe, Jinja, Uganda. Action Res 8:53–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750309335210

Wood L, Govender B (2013) You learn from going through the process: the perceptions of South Africa school leaders about action research. Action Res 11:176–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750313479411

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the staff and partners of the BRIDGE project who participated in the interviews on the action research activities during the review.

This work was supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands through its embassy in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed here are those of the authors alone.

Author information

Present address: Ethiopian Society of Animal Production, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Tinsae Berhanu & Demewez Moges

Present address: SNV Ethiopia, P.O. Box 40675, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Authors and Affiliations

Wageningen Livestock Research, Wageningen University & Research (WUR), Droevendaalsesteeg 1, Wageningen, 6708 PB, The Netherlands

Augustine A. Ayantunde, Abule Ebro, Tinsae Berhanu, Demewez Moges & Jan van der Lee

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Ayantunde designed the study, conducted the interview on action research activities of the project and prepared the first draft of the manuscript. Ebro, Berhanu and Moges provided logistical support for the interview and the field visits, and contributed to the review of the manuscript while van der Lee provided critical review of the study design and contributed to the review of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Augustine A. Ayantunde .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Ayantunde, A.A., Ebro, A., Berhanu, T. et al. Action Research in Agricultural Development Projects: Case Study of a Dairy Project in Ethiopia. Syst Pract Action Res (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-024-09673-3

Download citation

Accepted : 05 April 2024

Published : 13 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-024-09673-3

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Agricultural development
• Dairy sector
• Stakeholder participation
• Participatory learning
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Find Info For

• Current Students
• Prospective Students
• Research and Partnerships
• Entrepreneurship and Commercialization

Quick Links

• Health and Life Sciences
• Info Security and AI
• Transformative Education
• Purdue Today
• Purdue Global
• Purdue in the News

April 3, 2024

SK hynix announces semiconductor advanced packaging investment in Purdue Research Park

SK hynix announced Wednesday (April 3) semiconductor advanced packaging investment in Purdue Research Park. From left to right: Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb; Kwak Noh-jung, SK hynix president and CEO; Woojin Choi, SK hynix executive vice president; Arati Prabhakar, director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and assistant to the president for science and technology; Mung Chiang, Purdue University president (speaking); Arun Venkataraman, U.S. Department of Commerce assistant secretary; U.S. Sen. Todd Young; Hyundong Cho, ambassador of the Republic of Korea to the United States; David Rosenberg, Indiana secretary of commerce; Mitch Daniels, Purdue Research Foundation chairman. (Purdue University/Kelsey Lefever)

The company's facility for AI memory chips marks the largest single economic development in the history of the state

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. — SK hynix Inc. announced Wednesday (April 3) that it plans to invest close to $4 billion to build an advanced packaging fabrication and R&D facility for AI products in the Purdue Research Park. The development of a critical link in the U.S. semiconductor supply chain in West Lafayette marks a giant leap forward in the industry and the state. 

“We are excited to build a state-of-the-art advanced packaging facility in Indiana,” said SK hynix CEO Kwak Noh-Jung. “We believe this project will lay the foundation for a new Silicon Heartland, a semiconductor ecosystem centered in the Midwest Triangle. This facility will create local, high-paying jobs and produce AI memory chips with unmatched capabilities, so that America can onshore more of its critical chip supply chain. We are grateful for the support of Gov. Holcomb and the state of Indiana, of President Chiang at Purdue University, and of the broader community involved, and we look forward to expanding our partnership in the long run.”

SK hynix joins Bayer, imec, MediaTek, Rolls-Royce, Saab and many more national and international companies bringing innovation to America's heartland. The new facility — home to an advanced semiconductor packaging production line that will mass-produce next-generation high-bandwidth memory, or HBM, chips, the critical component of graphic processing units that train AI systems such as ChatGPT — is expected to provide more than a thousand new employment opportunities in the Greater Lafayette community. The company plans to begin mass production in the second half of 2028.

The project marks SK hynix’s intention for long-term investment and partnership in Greater Lafayette. The company’s decision-making framework prioritizes both profit and social responsibility while promoting ethical actions and accountability. From infrastructure developments that make accessing amenities easier to community empowerment projects such as skill development and mentorship, the SK hynix advanced packaging fabrication marks a new era of collaborative growth.

“Indiana is a global leader in innovating and producing the products that will power our future economy, and today’s news is proof positive of that fact,” said Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb. “I’m so proud to officially welcome SK hynix to Indiana, and we’re confident this new partnership will enhance the Lafayette-West Lafayette region, Purdue University and the state of Indiana for the long term. This new semiconductor innovation and packaging plant not only reaffirms the state’s role in the hard-tech sector, but is also another tremendous step forward in advancing U.S. innovation and national security, putting Hoosiers at the forefront of national and global advancements.” 

Investment in the Midwest and Indiana was spurred by Purdue’s excellence in discovery and innovation and its track record of exceptional R&D and talent development through collaboration. Partnerships among Purdue, the corporate sector, and the state and federal government are essential to advancing the U.S. semiconductor industry and establishing the region as the Silicon Heartland.

“SK hynix is the global pioneer and dominant market leader in memory chips for AI,” Purdue President Mung Chiang said. “This transformational investment reflects our state and university’s tremendous strength in semiconductors, hardware AI and development of the Hard-Tech Corridor. It is also a monumental moment for completing the supply chain of the digital economy in our country through the advanced packaging of chips. Located at Purdue Research Park, the largest facility of its kind at a U.S. university will grow and succeed through innovation.”

In 1990 the U.S. was producing nearly 40% of the world’s semiconductors. However, as manufacturing moved to Southeast Asia and China, the U.S. global output of semiconductor manufacturing has fallen to closer to 12%.

“SK hynix will soon be a household name in Indiana,” said U.S. Sen. Todd Young. “This incredible investment demonstrates their confidence in Hoosier workers, and I’m excited to welcome them to our state. The CHIPS and Science Act opened a door that Indiana has been able to sprint through, and companies like SK hynix are helping to build our high-tech future.” 

To aid in bringing semiconductor manufacturing closer to home and shoring up global supply chains, the U.S. Congress introduced the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors for America Act, or CHIPS and Science Act, on June 11, 2020. Signed by President Joe Biden on Aug. 9, 2022, it funds holistic development of the semiconductor industry to the tune of $280 billion. It supports the nation's research and development, manufacturing, and supply chain security of semiconductors.

“When President Biden signed the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act, he put a stake in the ground and sent a signal to the world that the United States cares about semiconductor manufacturing,” said Arati Prabhakar, President Biden’s chief science and technology advisor and director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. “Today’s announcement will strengthen the economy and national security, and it will create good jobs that support families. This is how we do big things in America.”

Purdue Research Park, one of the largest university-affiliated incubation complexes in the country, unites discovery and delivery with easy access to Purdue faculty experts in the semiconductor field, highly sought-after graduates prepared to work in the industry, and vast Purdue research resources. The park also offers convenient accessibility for workforce and semitruck traffic, with access to I-65 just minutes away.

This historic announcement is the next step in Purdue University’s persistent pursuit of semiconductor excellence as part of the Purdue Computes initiative. Recent announcements include these

• Purdue University Comprehensive Semiconductors and Microelectronics Program
• A strategic partnership with Dassault Systèmes to improve, accelerate and transform semiconductor workforce development
• European technology leader imec opens innovation hub at Purdue
• The nation’s first comprehensive Semiconductor Degrees Program
• Purdue continues to create unique lab-to-fab ecosystem for the state and country
• Green2Gold, a collaboration between Ivy Tech Community College and Purdue University to grow Indiana’s engineering workforce

What they’re saying

• “This decision by a world-renowned, best-in-class company represents a dramatic fulfillment of Purdue’s duty to serve the state as not only its premier academic institution but also its No. 1 economic asset. It’s also a gratifying validation of our Discovery Park District initiative to bring new opportunities to our students, faculty and Greater Lafayette neighbors. Today marks the Purdue ecosystem’s latest and greatest, but assuredly not its last, contribution to a more prosperous Indiana and a stronger America.” — Mitch Daniels, chairman of the board, Purdue Research Foundation
• “On behalf of my fellow trustees, we are pleased to welcome SK hynix Inc. to the Purdue Research Park. Their arrival will significantly strengthen Purdue University’s dual commitments to educating the next generation of workforce leaders in semiconductors and supporting the national security of our nation.” — Michael Berghoff, chair, Purdue Board of Trustees
• “The impact of SK hynix is more than the creation of high-paying careers for Hoosiers. Undergraduates will have opportunities for internships, co-op and full-time employment when they graduate. Graduate students and faculty will work closely with SK hynix researchers, not only on basic research, but also to accelerate the transition of research into pilot production and manufacturing. This is just the beginning. As other companies see what’s happening here in the heart of the heartland, they’ll come too, and a significant new cluster of semiconductor manufacturing and research will emerge.” — Mark Lundstrom, chief semiconductor officer, Purdue University
• “West Lafayette is thrilled to join our national efforts to bring the semiconductor industry to the United States through President Biden’s CHIPS and Science Act. This partnership will leverage Purdue University’s science and research expertise with SK hynix’s innovation in semiconductor technology. The impact on West Lafayette will enable us to continue to provide the high level of service our community expects and to increase our quality-of-life amenities for the region so we can attract and retain the excellent graduates of Purdue University. In addition, SK hynix’s global dedication to net zero carbon emissions by 2050, water process reduction and recycling, and zero-waste-to-landfill programs aligns with our community’s commitment to environmental stewardship. We are grateful for SK hynix’s investment and commitment to West Lafayette and for our partners Purdue University, Purdue Research Foundation, the city of Lafayette, Tippecanoe County and the Greater Lafayette region.” — Erin Easter, mayor of West Lafayette
• “The pandemic disruption has shown the reliance on semiconductors, with production concentrated in limited regions around the world. Greater Lafayette has worked continuously and cooperatively for years to position ourselves for an opportunity of this magnitude, and we look forward to the long-term economic impact this will have on our communities. The collaborative efforts between cities and county governments, Purdue University, the state of Indiana and Sen. Todd Young’s office is a testament to these efforts. Our joint investments in infrastructure, innovation, along with quality-of-life initiatives, have contributed to this venture becoming a reality. We look forward to working with and welcoming SK hynix to Greater Lafayette!” — Tony Roswarski, mayor of Lafayette
• “Ivy Tech, as Indiana’s largest postsecondary institution, is focused on building Indiana talent pipelines aligned to employers and emerging industries which strengthen Indiana’s economy. The microelectronics industry will play a key role in Indiana’s success, which is why we are pleased to work with SK hynix and Purdue to provide training, credentials and degrees designed for the semiconductor industry. SK hynix’s commitment to Indiana reinforces that we all win when we address complex issues through strong partnerships." — Sue Ellspermann, president, Ivy Tech Community College
• “Semiconductors and microelectronics are at the forefront of focus for Purdue Research Foundation. I am pleased to welcome SK hynix to Indiana and start the hard work of ensuring this is the best business decision that SK hynix has ever made.” — Brian Edelman, president, Purdue Research Foundation
• “The Alliances team is thrilled to welcome SK hynix to the Purdue ecosystem, and we look forward to empowering them to thrive here in Indiana with all the immense assets Purdue and Greater Lafayette offer. We look forward to forging a strong relationship with mutual value for SK hynix, Purdue Research Foundation and the broader Greater Lafayette community for many years to come.” — Gregory Deason, senior vice president of alliances and placemaking, Purdue Research Foundation
• “During my time at Purdue Research Foundation, we have consistently been successful in assisting our partners like Saab in developing complex builds well ahead of schedule and within budget. I look forward to building on our excellent track record with SK hynix to help them in creating a state-of-the-art facility which best meets their unique needs.” — Richard Michal, senior vice president of capital projects and facilities, Purdue Research Foundation

About SK hynix Inc.

SK hynix Inc., headquartered in Korea, is the world’s top-tier semiconductor supplier offering Dynamic Random Access Memory chips (“DRAM”), flash memory chips (“NAND   flash”)   and CMOS Image Sensors (“CIS”) for a wide range of distinguished customers globally. The Company’s shares are traded on the Korea Exchange, and the Global Depository shares are listed on the Luxembourg Stock Exchange. Further information about SK hynix is available at   www.skhynix.com ,   news.skhynix.com .  

About Purdue Research Foundation

Purdue Research Foundation is a private, nonprofit foundation created to advance the mission of Purdue University. Established in 1930, the foundation accepts gifts, administers trusts, funds scholarships and grants, acquires and sells property, protects and licenses Purdue's intellectual property, and supports creating Purdue-connected startups on behalf of Purdue. The foundation operates Purdue Innovates, which includes the Office of Technology Commercialization, Incubator and Ventures. The foundation manages the Purdue Research Park, Discovery Park District, Purdue Technology Centers and Purdue for Life Foundation.

For more information on licensing a Purdue innovation, contact the Office of Technology Commercialization at [email protected] . For more information about involvement and investment opportunities in startups based on a Purdue innovation, contact Purdue Innovates at [email protected] .

About Purdue University

Purdue University is a public research institution demonstrating excellence at scale. Ranked among top 10 public universities and with two colleges in the top four in the United States, Purdue discovers and disseminates knowledge with a quality and at a scale second to none. More than 105,000 students study at Purdue across modalities and locations, including nearly 50,000 in person on the West Lafayette campus. Committed to affordability and accessibility, Purdue’s main campus has frozen tuition 13 years in a row. See how Purdue never stops in the persistent pursuit of the next giant leap — including its first comprehensive urban campus in Indianapolis, the new Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr. School of Business, and Purdue Computes — at https://www.purdue.edu/president/strategic-initiatives . 

Media contact:

Tim Doty, [email protected]

Note to journalists:   Photo, b-roll and sound bites from this announcement will be available for media use on   Google Drive .

Research News

Communication.

• OneCampus Portal
• Brightspace
• BoilerConnect
• Faculty and Staff
• Human Resources
• Colleges and Schools

Info for Staff

• Purdue Moves
• Board of Trustees
• University Senate
• Center for Healthy Living
• Information Technology
• Ethics & Compliance
• Campus Disruptions

Purdue University, 610 Purdue Mall, West Lafayette, IN 47907, (765) 494-4600

© 2015-24 Purdue University | An equal access/equal opportunity university | Copyright Complaints | Maintained by Office of Strategic Communications

Trouble with this page? Disability-related accessibility issue? Please contact News Service at [email protected] .

Read our research on: Gun Policy | International Conflict | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

1. the partisanship and ideology of american voters.

The partisan identification of registered voters is now evenly split between the two major parties: 49% of registered voters are Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, and a nearly identical share – 48% – are Republicans or lean to the Republican Party.

The partisan balance has tightened in recent years following a clear edge in Democratic Party affiliation during the last administration.

• Four years ago, in the run-up to the 2020 election, Democrats had a 5 percentage point advantage over the GOP (51% vs. 46%).

The share of voters who are in the Democratic coalition reached 55% in 2008. For much of the last three decades of Pew Research Center surveys, the partisan composition of registered voters has been more closely divided.

Partisans and partisan leaners in the U.S. electorate

About two-thirds of registered voters identify as a partisan, and they are roughly evenly split between those who say they are Republicans (32% of voters) and those who say they are Democrats (33%). Roughly a third instead say they are independents or something else (35%), with most of these voters leaning toward one of the parties. Partisan leaners often share the same political views and behaviors as those who directly identify with the party they favor.

The share of voters who identify as independent or something else is somewhat higher than in the late 1990s and early 2000s. As a result, there are more “leaners” today than in the past. Currently, 15% of voters lean toward the Republican Party and 16% lean toward the Democratic Party. By comparison, in 1994, 27% of voters leaned toward either the GOP (15%) or the Democratic Party (12%).

Party identification and ideology

While the electorate overall is nearly equally divided between those who align with the Republican and Democratic parties, a greater share of registered voters say they are both ideologically conservative and associate with the Republican Party (33%) than say they are liberal and align with the Democratic Party (23%).

A quarter of voters associate with the Democratic Party and describe their views as either conservative or moderate, and 14% identify as moderates or liberals and are Republicans or Republican leaners.

The partisan and ideological composition of voters is relatively unchanged over the last five years.

(As a result of significant mode differences in measures of ideology between telephone and online surveys, there is not directly comparable data on ideology prior to 2019.)

Add Pew Research Center to your Alexa

Say “Alexa, enable the Pew Research Center flash briefing”

Report Materials

Table of contents, behind biden’s 2020 victory, a voter data resource: detailed demographic tables about verified voters in 2016, 2018, what the 2020 electorate looks like by party, race and ethnicity, age, education and religion, interactive map: the changing racial and ethnic makeup of the u.s. electorate, in changing u.s. electorate, race and education remain stark dividing lines, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

2.1.4: Components of a Research Project

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 85831

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

• Describe useful strategies to employ when searching for literature.
• Describe why sociologists review prior literature and how they organize their literature reviews.
• Identify the main sections contained in scholarly journal articles.
• Identify and describe the major components researchers need to plan for when designing a research project.

In this section, we’ll examine the most typical components that make up a research project, bringing in a few additional components to those we have already discussed. Keep in mind that our purpose at this stage is simply to provide a general overview of research design. The specifics of each of the following components will vary from project to project. Further, the stage of a project at which each of these components comes into play may vary. In later chapters, we will consider more specifically how these components work differently depending on the research method being employed.

Searching for Literature

Familiarizing yourself with research that has already been conducted on your topic is one of the first stages of conducting a research project and is crucial for coming up with a good research design. But where to start? How to start? In  Chapter 1.3 "Beginning a Research Project" , you learned about some of the most common databases that house information about published sociological research. As you search for literature, you may have to be fairly broad in your search for articles.

I’m guessing you may feel you’ve heard enough about electronic gadget addiction in this chapter, so let’s consider a different example here. On my campus, much to the chagrin of a group of student smokers, smoking was recently banned. These students were so upset by the idea that they would no longer be allowed to smoke on university grounds that they staged several smoke-outs during which they gathered in populated areas around campus and enjoyed a puff or two together.

A student in my research methods class wanted to understand what motivated this group of students to engage in activism centered around what she perceived to be, in this age of smoke-free facilities, a relatively deviant act. Were the protesters otherwise politically active? How much effort and coordination had it taken to organize the smoke-outs? The student researcher began her research by attempting to familiarize herself with the literature on her topic. Yet her search in Sociological Abstracts for “college student activist smoke-outs,” yielded no results. Concluding there was no prior research on her topic, she informed me that she would need an alternative assignment to the  annotated bibliography  I required since there was no literature for her to review. How do you suppose I responded to this news? What went wrong with this student’s search for literature?

In her first attempt, the student had been too narrow in her search for articles. But did that mean she was off the hook for completing the annotated bibliography assignment? Absolutely not. Instead, she went back to Sociological Abstracts and searched again using different combinations of search terms. Rather than searching for “college student activist smoke-outs” she tried, among other sets of terms, “college student activism.” This time her search yielded a great many articles. Of course, they were not focused on prosmoking activist efforts, but they were focused on her population of interest, college students, and on her broad topic of interest, activism. I suggested that reading articles on college student activism might give her some idea about what other researchers have found in terms of what motivates college students to become involved in activist efforts. I also suggested she could play around with her search terms and look for research on activism centered on other sorts of activities that are perceived by some as deviant, such as marijuana use or veganism. In other words, she needed to be broader in her search for articles.

While this student found success by broadening her search for articles, her reading of those articles needed to be narrower than her search. Once she identified a set of articles to review by searching broadly, it was time to remind herself of her specific research focus: college student activist smoke-outs. Keeping in mind her particular research interest while reviewing the literature gave her the chance to think about how the theories and findings covered in prior studies might or might not apply to her particular point of focus. For example, theories on what motivates activists to get involved might tell her something about the likely reasons the students  she  planned to study got involved. At the same time, those theories might not cover all the particulars of student participation in smoke-outs. Thinking about the different theories then gave the student the opportunity to focus her research plans and even to develop a few hypotheses about what she thought she was likely to find.

Reviewing the Literature

Developing an annotated bibliography is often one of the early steps that researchers take as they begin to familiarize themselves with prior research on their topic. A second step involves a literature review in which a researcher positions his or her work within the context of prior scholarly work in the area. A literature review addresses the following matters: What sorts of questions have other scholars asked about this topic? What do we already know about this topic? What questions remain? As the researcher answers these questions, he or she synthesizes what is contained in the literature, possibly organizing prior findings around themes that are relevant to his or her particular research focus.

I once advised an undergraduate student who conducted a research project on speciesism, the belief that some species are superior to or have more value and rights than others. Her research question was “Why and how do humans construct divisions between themselves and animals?” This student organized her review of literature around the two parts of her research question: the why and the how. In the “why” section of her literature review, she described prior research that addressed questions of why humans are sometimes speciesist. She organized subsections around the three most common answers that were presented in the scholarly literature. She used the same structure in the “how” section of her literature review, arranging subsections around the answers posed in previous literature about  how  humans construct divisions between themselves and animals. This organizational scheme helped readers understand what we already know about the topic and what theories we rely on to help make sense of the topic. In addition, by also highlighting what we still don’t know, it helped the student set the stage for her own empirical research on the topic.

The preceding discussion about how to organize a review of scholarly literature assumes that we all know how to read scholarly literature. Yes, yes, I understand that you must know how to read. But reading scholarly articles can be a bit more challenging than reading a textbook. Here are a few pointers about how to do it successfully. First, it is important to understand the various sections that are typically contained in scholarly journals’ reports of empirical research. One of the most important and easiest to spot sections of a journal article is its  abstract , the short paragraph at the beginning of an article that summarizes the author’s research question, methods used to answer the question, and key findings. The abstract may also give you some idea about the theoretical proclivities of the author. As a result, reading the abstract gives you both a framework for understanding the rest of the article and the punch line. It tells you what the author(s) found and whether the article is relevant to your area of inquiry.

After the abstract, most journal articles will contain the following sections (although exact section names are likely to vary): introduction, literature review, methodology, findings, and discussion. Of course, there will also be a list of references cited,Lists of references cited are a useful source for finding additional literature in an area. and there may be a few tables, figures, or appendices at the end of the article as well. While you should get into the habit of familiarizing yourself with articles you wish to cite  in their entirety , there are strategic ways to read journal articles that can make them a little easier to digest. Once you have read the abstract and determined that this is an article you’d like to read in full, read through the discussion section at the end of the article next. Because your own review of literature is likely to emphasize findings from previous literature, you should make sure that you have a clear idea about what those findings are. Reading an article’s discussion section helps you understand what the author views as the study’s major findings and how the author perceives those findings to relate to other research.

As you read through the rest of the article, think about the elements of research design that we have covered in this chapter. What approach does the researcher take? Is the research exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory? Is it inductive or deductive? Idiographic or nomothetic? Qualitative or quantitative? What claims does the author make about causality? What are the author’s units of analysis and observation? Use what you have learned in this chapter about the promise and potential pitfalls associated with each of these research elements to help you responsibly read and understand the articles you review. Future chapters of this text will address other elements of journal articles, including choices about measurement, sampling, and research method. As you learn about these additional items, you will increasingly gain more knowledge that you can apply as you read and critique the scholarly literature in your area of inquiry.

Additional Important Components

Thinking about the overarching goals of your research project and finding and reviewing the existing literature on your topic are two of the initial steps you’ll take when designing a research project. Forming a clear research question, as discussed in  Chapter 1.3 "Beginning a Research Project" , is another crucial step. There are a number of other important research design components you’ll need to consider, and we will discuss those here.

At the same time that you work to identify a clear research question, you will probably also think about the overarching goals of your research project. Will it be exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory? Will your approach be idiographic or nomothetic, inductive or deductive? How you design your project might also be determined in part by whether you aim for your research to have some direct application or if your goal is to contribute more generally to sociological knowledge about your topic. Next, think about what your units of analysis and units of observation will be. These will help you identify the key concepts you will study. Once you have identified those concepts, you’ll need to decide how to define them, and how you’ll  know  that you’re observing them when it comes time to collect your data. Defining your concepts, and knowing them when you see them, has to do with conceptualization and operationalization. Of course, you also need to know what approach you will take to collect your data. Thus identifying your research method is another important part of research design. You also need to think about who your research participants will be and what larger group(s) they may represent. Last, but certainly not least, you should consider any potential ethical concerns that could arise during the course of your research project. These concerns might come up during your data collection, but they might also arise when you get to the point of analyzing or sharing your research results.

Decisions about the various research components do not necessarily occur in sequential order. In fact, you may have to think about potential ethical concerns even before zeroing in on a specific research question. Similarly, the goal of being able to make generalizations about your population of interest could shape the decisions you make about your method of data collection. Putting it all together, the following list shows some of the major components you’ll need to consider as you design your research project:

• Research question
• Literature review
• Research strategy (idiographic or nomothetic, inductive or deductive)
• Research goals (basic or applied)
• Units of analysis and units of observation
• Key concepts (conceptualization and operationalization)
• Method of data collection
• Research participants (sample and population)
• Ethical concerns

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• When identifying and reading relevant literature, be broad in your search  for  articles, but be narrower in your reading  of  articles.
• Writing an annotated bibliography can be a helpful first step to familiarize yourself with prior research in your area of interest.
• Literature reviews summarize and synthesize prior research.
• Literature reviews are typically organized around substantive ideas that are relevant to one’s research question rather than around individual studies or article authors.
• When designing a research project, be sure to think about, plan for, and identify a research question, a review of literature, a research strategy, research goals, units of analysis and units of observation, key concepts, method(s) of data collection, population and sample, and potential ethical concerns.
• Find and read a complete journal article that addresses a topic that is of interest to you (perhaps using Sociological Abstracts, which is introduced in  Chapter 3.1 "Beginning a Research Project" ). In four to eight sentences, summarize the author’s research question, theoretical framing, methods used, and major findings. Reread the article, and see how close you were in reporting these key elements. What did you understand and remember best? What did you leave out? What reading strategies may have helped you better recall relevant details from the article?
• Using the example of students’ electronic gadget addictions, design a hypothetical research project by identifying a plan for each of the nine components of research design that are presented in this section.

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.