This paper is reviewed in accordance with the Peer Review Program of IRA Academico Research
Framework for Identifying Research Gaps for Future Academic Research
Abstract
Wang, Wang, Chen, and Yang (2016) defined research gaps as a region where the ability to infer a particular question is constrained by a lack of knowledge. It is an area where the methods and insufficient research data have limited the capacity to get to a fully reliable judgment on a research subject. Therefore, academics need to situate their objectives in the research gap of the subject field. Particularly research gaps are those research questions that have not been addressed properly beforehand. This not only indicates the study's relevancy but also the considerable contribution it could bring to the field of study (Issah, Hamza, & Prosper, 2022). According to Ajemba and Arene (2022) posing questions and finding new research areas based on previous studies are the first steps in doing research. The limitations of the study's design, the use of inadequate instruments, or other factors that the researcher could or could not control led to the development of a research gap. For new and inexperienced researchers, it might be challenging to explore the research gap due to a limited amount of criteria or established methodologies, making research gap analysis confusing and equivocal. For example, if the researcher is investigating a broad region and then going to pick a more specific field might contribute to the description of a statement of the problem. This study's goal is to offer a methodology for determining research gaps. It will make recommendations based on each aspect of the research gap analysis framework.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abass, H., Banjo, H., & Abosede, A. (2020). Research Gaps: Sources and Methods of Identification. In (pp. 150-157).
Ajemba, M. N., & Arene, E. C. (2022). Research gaps for future research and their identification. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 16(1), 575-579. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2022.16.1.1062
Carley, K. (1993). Coding choices for textual analysis: A comparison of content analysis and map analysis. Sociological Methodology, 75-126. https://doi.org/10.2307/271007
Duriau, V. J., Reger, R. K., & Pfarrer, M. D. (2007). A content analysis of the content analysis literature in organization studies: Research themes, data sources, and methodological refinements. Organizational research methods, 10(1), 5-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106289252
Farooq, R. (2017). A framework for identifying research gap in social sciences: Evidence from the past. IUP Journal of Management Research, 16(4), 66-75.
Gheyle, N., & Jacobs, T. (2017). Content Analysis: a short overview.
Hoffmann, K., & Doucette, L. (2012). A review of citation analysis methodologies for collection management. College & Research Libraries, 73(4), 321-335. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl-254
Issah, B., Hamza, A., & Prosper, G. (2022). Understanding and spotting research gaps through a systematic literature review. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), 6(III), 549-554.
Nunn, J., & Chang, S. (2020). What are Systematic Reviews? WikiJournal of Medicine, 7, 5. doi:10.15347/WJM/2020.005
Pigott, T. D., & Polanin, J. R. (2020). Methodological guidance paper: High-quality meta-analysis in a systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 90(1), 24-46.
Price, J. H., & Murnan, J. (2004). Research Limitations and the Necessity of Reporting Them. American Journal of Health Education, 35(2), 66-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2004.10603611
Robinson, K. A., Saldanha, I. J., & Mckoy, N. A. (2011). Development of a framework to identify research gaps from systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(12), 1325-1330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.06.009
Rousseau, R. (2008). Social information systems: Emerging technology and applications for searching the web effectively. Information Science Reference, 13, 252-267.
Smith, L. C. (1981). Citation analysis.
Wang, Q., Wang, X., Chen, Y., & Yang, K. (2016). Research gap of guidelines might be an important approach to prioritization (Letter commenting on: J Clin Epidemiol. 2015; 68: 341-6). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 69, 251-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.05.013
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. This article can be used for non-commercial purposes. Mentioning of the publication source is mandatory while referring this article in any future works.