what chapter is the research gap

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Gap – Types, Examples and How to Identify

Research Gap – Types, Examples and How to Identify

Table of Contents

Research Gap

Definition:

Research gap refers to an area or topic within a field of study that has not yet been extensively researched or is yet to be explored. It is a question, problem or issue that has not been addressed or resolved by previous research.

How to Identify Research Gap

Identifying a research gap is an essential step in conducting research that adds value and contributes to the existing body of knowledge. Research gap requires critical thinking, creativity, and a thorough understanding of the existing literature . It is an iterative process that may require revisiting and refining your research questions and ideas multiple times.

Here are some steps that can help you identify a research gap:

• Review existing literature: Conduct a thorough review of the existing literature in your research area. This will help you identify what has already been studied and what gaps still exist.
• Identify a research problem: Identify a specific research problem or question that you want to address.
• Analyze existing research: Analyze the existing research related to your research problem. This will help you identify areas that have not been studied, inconsistencies in the findings, or limitations of the previous research.
• Brainstorm potential research ideas : Based on your analysis, brainstorm potential research ideas that address the identified gaps.
• Consult with experts: Consult with experts in your research area to get their opinions on potential research ideas and to identify any additional gaps that you may have missed.
• Refine research questions: Refine your research questions and hypotheses based on the identified gaps and potential research ideas.
• Develop a research proposal: Develop a research proposal that outlines your research questions, objectives, and methods to address the identified research gap.

Types of Research Gap

There are different types of research gaps that can be identified, and each type is associated with a specific situation or problem. Here are the main types of research gaps and their explanations:

Theoretical Gap

This type of research gap refers to a lack of theoretical understanding or knowledge in a particular area. It can occur when there is a discrepancy between existing theories and empirical evidence or when there is no theory that can explain a particular phenomenon. Identifying theoretical gaps can lead to the development of new theories or the refinement of existing ones.

Empirical Gap

An empirical gap occurs when there is a lack of empirical evidence or data in a particular area. It can happen when there is a lack of research on a specific topic or when existing research is inadequate or inconclusive. Identifying empirical gaps can lead to the development of new research studies to collect data or the refinement of existing research methods to improve the quality of data collected.

Methodological Gap

This type of research gap refers to a lack of appropriate research methods or techniques to answer a research question. It can occur when existing methods are inadequate, outdated, or inappropriate for the research question. Identifying methodological gaps can lead to the development of new research methods or the modification of existing ones to better address the research question.

Practical Gap

A practical gap occurs when there is a lack of practical applications or implementation of research findings. It can occur when research findings are not implemented due to financial, political, or social constraints. Identifying practical gaps can lead to the development of strategies for the effective implementation of research findings in practice.

Knowledge Gap

This type of research gap occurs when there is a lack of knowledge or information on a particular topic. It can happen when a new area of research is emerging, or when research is conducted in a different context or population. Identifying knowledge gaps can lead to the development of new research studies or the extension of existing research to fill the gap.

Examples of Research Gap

Here are some examples of research gaps that researchers might identify:

• Theoretical Gap Example : In the field of psychology, there might be a theoretical gap related to the lack of understanding of the relationship between social media use and mental health. Although there is existing research on the topic, there might be a lack of consensus on the mechanisms that link social media use to mental health outcomes.
• Empirical Gap Example : In the field of environmental science, there might be an empirical gap related to the lack of data on the long-term effects of climate change on biodiversity in specific regions. Although there might be some studies on the topic, there might be a lack of data on the long-term effects of climate change on specific species or ecosystems.
• Methodological Gap Example : In the field of education, there might be a methodological gap related to the lack of appropriate research methods to assess the impact of online learning on student outcomes. Although there might be some studies on the topic, existing research methods might not be appropriate to assess the complex relationships between online learning and student outcomes.
• Practical Gap Example: In the field of healthcare, there might be a practical gap related to the lack of effective strategies to implement evidence-based practices in clinical settings. Although there might be existing research on the effectiveness of certain practices, they might not be implemented in practice due to various barriers, such as financial constraints or lack of resources.
• Knowledge Gap Example: In the field of anthropology, there might be a knowledge gap related to the lack of understanding of the cultural practices of indigenous communities in certain regions. Although there might be some research on the topic, there might be a lack of knowledge about specific cultural practices or beliefs that are unique to those communities.

Examples of Research Gap In Literature Review, Thesis, and Research Paper might be:

• Literature review : A literature review on the topic of machine learning and healthcare might identify a research gap in the lack of studies that investigate the use of machine learning for early detection of rare diseases.
• Thesis : A thesis on the topic of cybersecurity might identify a research gap in the lack of studies that investigate the effectiveness of artificial intelligence in detecting and preventing cyber attacks.
• Research paper : A research paper on the topic of natural language processing might identify a research gap in the lack of studies that investigate the use of natural language processing techniques for sentiment analysis in non-English languages.

How to Write Research Gap

By following these steps, you can effectively write about research gaps in your paper and clearly articulate the contribution that your study will make to the existing body of knowledge.

Here are some steps to follow when writing about research gaps in your paper:

• Identify the research question : Before writing about research gaps, you need to identify your research question or problem. This will help you to understand the scope of your research and identify areas where additional research is needed.
• Review the literature: Conduct a thorough review of the literature related to your research question. This will help you to identify the current state of knowledge in the field and the gaps that exist.
• Identify the research gap: Based on your review of the literature, identify the specific research gap that your study will address. This could be a theoretical, empirical, methodological, practical, or knowledge gap.
• Provide evidence: Provide evidence to support your claim that the research gap exists. This could include a summary of the existing literature, a discussion of the limitations of previous studies, or an analysis of the current state of knowledge in the field.
• Explain the importance: Explain why it is important to fill the research gap. This could include a discussion of the potential implications of filling the gap, the significance of the research for the field, or the potential benefits to society.
• State your research objectives: State your research objectives, which should be aligned with the research gap you have identified. This will help you to clearly articulate the purpose of your study and how it will address the research gap.

Importance of Research Gap

The importance of research gaps can be summarized as follows:

• Advancing knowledge: Identifying research gaps is crucial for advancing knowledge in a particular field. By identifying areas where additional research is needed, researchers can fill gaps in the existing body of knowledge and contribute to the development of new theories and practices.
• Guiding research: Research gaps can guide researchers in designing studies that fill those gaps. By identifying research gaps, researchers can develop research questions and objectives that are aligned with the needs of the field and contribute to the development of new knowledge.
• Enhancing research quality: By identifying research gaps, researchers can avoid duplicating previous research and instead focus on developing innovative research that fills gaps in the existing body of knowledge. This can lead to more impactful research and higher-quality research outputs.
• Informing policy and practice: Research gaps can inform policy and practice by highlighting areas where additional research is needed to inform decision-making. By filling research gaps, researchers can provide evidence-based recommendations that have the potential to improve policy and practice in a particular field.

Applications of Research Gap

Here are some potential applications of research gap:

• Informing research priorities: Research gaps can help guide research funding agencies and researchers to prioritize research areas that require more attention and resources.
• Identifying practical implications: Identifying gaps in knowledge can help identify practical applications of research that are still unexplored or underdeveloped.
• Stimulating innovation: Research gaps can encourage innovation and the development of new approaches or methodologies to address unexplored areas.
• Improving policy-making: Research gaps can inform policy-making decisions by highlighting areas where more research is needed to make informed policy decisions.
• Enhancing academic discourse: Research gaps can lead to new and constructive debates and discussions within academic communities, leading to more robust and comprehensive research.

Advantages of Research Gap

Here are some of the advantages of research gap:

• Identifies new research opportunities: Identifying research gaps can help researchers identify areas that require further exploration, which can lead to new research opportunities.
• Improves the quality of research: By identifying gaps in current research, researchers can focus their efforts on addressing unanswered questions, which can improve the overall quality of research.
• Enhances the relevance of research: Research that addresses existing gaps can have significant implications for the development of theories, policies, and practices, and can therefore increase the relevance and impact of research.
• Helps avoid duplication of effort: Identifying existing research can help researchers avoid duplicating efforts, saving time and resources.
• Helps to refine research questions: Research gaps can help researchers refine their research questions, making them more focused and relevant to the needs of the field.
• Promotes collaboration: By identifying areas of research that require further investigation, researchers can collaborate with others to conduct research that addresses these gaps, which can lead to more comprehensive and impactful research outcomes.

Disadvantages of Research Gap

While research gaps can be advantageous, there are also some potential disadvantages that should be considered:

• Difficulty in identifying gaps: Identifying gaps in existing research can be challenging, particularly in fields where there is a large volume of research or where research findings are scattered across different disciplines.
• Lack of funding: Addressing research gaps may require significant resources, and researchers may struggle to secure funding for their work if it is perceived as too risky or uncertain.
• Time-consuming: Conducting research to address gaps can be time-consuming, particularly if the research involves collecting new data or developing new methods.
• Risk of oversimplification: Addressing research gaps may require researchers to simplify complex problems, which can lead to oversimplification and a failure to capture the complexity of the issues.
• Bias : Identifying research gaps can be influenced by researchers’ personal biases or perspectives, which can lead to a skewed understanding of the field.
• Potential for disagreement: Identifying research gaps can be subjective, and different researchers may have different views on what constitutes a gap in the field, leading to disagreements and debate.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Figures in Research Paper – Examples and Guide

Research Contribution – Thesis Guide

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing...

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and...

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Identify a Research Gap

5-minute read

• 10th January 2024

If you’ve been tasked with producing a thesis or dissertation, one of your first steps will be identifying a research gap. Although finding a research gap may sound daunting, don’t fret! In this post, we will define a research gap, discuss its importance, and offer a step-by-step guide that will provide you with the essential know-how to complete this critical step and move on to the rest of your research project.

What Is a Research Gap?

Simply put, a research gap is an area that hasn’t been explored in the existing literature. This could be an unexplored population, an untested method, or a condition that hasn’t been investigated yet. 

Why Is Identifying a Research Gap Important?

Identifying a research gap is a foundational step in the research process. It ensures that your research is significant and has the ability to advance knowledge within a specific area. It also helps you align your work with the current needs and challenges of your field. Identifying a research gap has many potential benefits.

1. Avoid Redundancy in Your Research

Understanding the existing literature helps researchers avoid duplication. This means you can steer clear of topics that have already been extensively studied. This ensures your work is novel and contributes something new to the field.

2. Guide the Research Design

Identifying a research gap helps shape your research design and questions. You can tailor your studies to specifically address the identified gap. This ensures that your work directly contributes to filling the void in knowledge.

3. Practical Applications

Research that addresses a gap is more likely to have practical applications and contributions. Whether in academia, industry, or policymaking, research that fills a gap in knowledge is often more applicable and can inform decision-making and practices in real-world contexts.

4. Field Advancements

Addressing a research gap can lead to advancements in the field . It may result in the development of new theories, methodologies, or technologies that push the boundaries of current understanding.

5. Strategic Research Planning

Identifying a research gap is crucial for strategic planning . It helps researchers and institutions prioritize areas that need attention so they can allocate resources effectively. This ensures that efforts are directed toward the most critical gaps in knowledge.

6. Academic and Professional Recognition

Researchers who successfully address significant research gaps often receive peer recognition within their academic and professional communities. This recognition can lead to opportunities for collaboration, funding, and career advancement.

How Do I Identify a Research Gap?

1. clearly define your research topic .

Begin by clearly defining your research topic. A well-scoped topic serves as the foundation for your studies. Make sure it’s not too broad or too narrow; striking the right balance will make it easier to identify gaps in existing literature.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

2. Conduct a Thorough Literature Review

A comprehensive literature review is a vital step in any research. Dive deep into the existing research related to your topic. Look for patterns, recurring themes, and consensus among scholars. Pay attention to areas where conflicting opinions or gaps in understanding emerge.

3. Evaluate Existing Studies

Critically evaluate the studies you encounter during your literature review. Assess the paradigms , methodologies, findings, and limitations of each. Note any discrepancies, unanswered questions, or areas where further investigation is warranted. These are potential indicators of research gaps.

4. Identify Unexplored Perspectives

Consider the perspectives presented in the existing literature. Are there alternative viewpoints or marginalized voices that haven’t been adequately explored? Identifying and incorporating diverse perspectives can often lead to uncharted territory and help you pinpoint a unique research gap.

Additional Tips

Stay up to date with emerging trends.

The field of research is dynamic, with new developments and emerging trends constantly shaping the landscape. Stay up to date with the latest publications, conferences, and discussions in your field and make sure to regularly check relevant academic search engines . Often, identifying a research gap involves being at the forefront of current debates and discussions.

Seek Guidance From Experts

Don’t hesitate to reach out to experts in your field for guidance. Attend conferences, workshops, or seminars where you can interact with seasoned researchers. Their insights and experience can provide valuable perspectives on potential research gaps that you may have overlooked. You can also seek advice from your academic advisor .

Use Research Tools and Analytics

Leverage tech tools to analyze patterns and trends in the existing literature. Tools like citation analysis, keyword mapping, and data visualization can help you identify gaps and areas with limited exploration.

Identifying a research gap is a skill that evolves with experience and dedication. By defining your research topic, meticulously navigating the existing literature, critically evaluating studies, and recognizing unexplored perspectives, you’ll be on your way to identifying a research gap that will serve as the foundation for your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

If you need any help with proofreading your research paper , we can help with our research paper editing services . You can even try a sample of our services for free . Good luck with all your research!

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

Free email newsletter template.

Promoting a brand means sharing valuable insights to connect more deeply with your audience, and...

6-minute read

How to Write a Nonprofit Grant Proposal

If you’re seeking funding to support your charitable endeavors as a nonprofit organization, you’ll need...

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Literature Review: 3 Essential Ingredients

The theoretical framework, empirical research and research gap

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewer: Eunice Rautenbach (DTech) | July 2023

Writing a comprehensive but concise literature review is no simple task. There’s a lot of ground to cover and it can be challenging to figure out what’s important and what’s not. In this post, we’ll unpack three essential ingredients that need to be woven into your literature review to lay a rock-solid foundation for your study.

This post is based on our popular online course, Literature Review Bootcamp . In the course, we walk you through the full process of developing a literature review, step by step. If it’s your first time writing a literature review, you definitely want to use this link to get 50% off the course (limited-time offer).

Overview: Essential Ingredients

• Ingredients vs structure
• The theoretical framework (foundation of theory)
• The empirical research
• The research gap
• Summary & key takeaways

Ingredients vs Structure

As a starting point, it’s important to clarify that the three ingredients we’ll cover in this video are things that need to feature within your literature review, as opposed to a set structure for your chapter . In other words, there are different ways you can weave these three ingredients into your literature review. Regardless of which structure you opt for, each of the three components will make an appearance in some shape or form. If you’re keen to learn more about structural options, we’ve got a dedicated post about that here .

1. The Theoretical Framework

Let’s kick off with the first essential ingredient – that is the theoretical framework , also called the foundation of theory . 

The foundation of theory, as the name suggests, is where you’ll lay down the foundational building blocks for your literature review so that your reader can get a clear idea of the core concepts, theories and assumptions (in relation to your research aims and questions) that will guide your study. Note that this is not the same as a conceptual framework .

Typically you’ll cover a few things within the theoretical framework:

Firstly, you’ll need to clearly define the key constructs and variables that will feature within your study. In many cases, any given term can have multiple different definitions or interpretations – for example, different people will define the concept of “integrity” in different ways. This variation in interpretation can, of course, wreak havoc on how your study is understood. So, this section is where you’ll pin down what exactly you mean when you refer to X, Y or Z in your study, as well as why you chose that specific definition. It’s also a good idea to state any assumptions that are inherent in these definitions and why these are acceptable, given the purpose of your study.

Related to this, the second thing you’ll need to cover in your theoretical framework is the relationships between these variables and/or constructs . For example, how does one variable potentially affect another variable – does A have an impact on B, B on A, and so on? In other words, you want to connect the dots between the different “things” of interest that you’ll be exploring in your study. Note that you only need to focus on the key items of interest here (i.e. those most central to your research aims and questions) – not every possible construct or variable.

Lastly, and very importantly, you need to discuss the existing theories that are relevant to your research aims and research questions . For example, if you’re investigating the uptake/adoption of a certain application or software, you might discuss Davis’ Technology Acceptance Model and unpack what it has to say about the factors that influence technology adoption. More importantly, though, you need to explain how this impacts your expectations about what you will find in your own study . In other words, your theoretical framework should reveal some insights about what answers you might expect to find to your research questions .

If this sounds a bit fluffy, don’t worry. We deep dive into the theoretical framework (as well as the conceptual framework) and look at practical examples in Literature Review Bootcamp . If you’d like to learn more, take advantage of the limited-time offer (60% off the standard price).

Need a helping hand?

2. The Empirical Research

Onto the second essential ingredient, which is  empirical research . This section is where you’ll present a critical discussion of the existing empirical research that is relevant to your research aims and questions.

But what exactly is empirical research?

Simply put, empirical research includes any study that involves actual data collection and analysis , whether that’s qualitative data, quantitative data, or a mix of both . This contrasts against purely theoretical literature (the previous ingredient), which draws its conclusions based exclusively on logic and reason , as opposed to an analysis of real-world data.

In other words, theoretical literature provides a prediction or expectation of what one might find based on reason and logic, whereas empirical research tests the accuracy of those predictions using actual real-world data . This reflects the broader process of knowledge creation – in other words, first developing a theory and then testing it out in the field.

Long story short, the second essential ingredient of a high-quality literature review is a critical discussion of the existing empirical research . Here, it’s important to go beyond description . You’ll need to present a critical analysis that addresses some (if not all) of the following questions:

• What have different studies found in relation to your research questions ?
• What contexts have (and haven’t been covered)? For example, certain countries, cities, cultures, etc.
• Are the findings across the studies similar or is there a lot of variation ? If so, why might this be the case?
• What sorts of research methodologies have been used and how could these help me develop my own methodology?
• What were the noteworthy limitations of these studies?

Simply put, your task here is to present a synthesis of what’s been done (and found) within the empirical research, so that you can clearly assess the current state of knowledge and identify potential research gaps , which leads us to our third essential ingredient.

The Research Gap

The third essential ingredient of a high-quality literature review is a discussion of the research gap (or gaps).

But what exactly is a research gap?

Simply put, a research gap is any unaddressed or inadequately explored area within the existing body of academic knowledge. In other words, a research gap emerges whenever there’s still some uncertainty regarding a certain topic or question.

For example, it might be the case that there are mixed findings regarding the relationship between two variables (e.g., job performance and work-from-home policies). Similarly, there might be a lack of research regarding the impact of a specific new technology on people’s mental health. On the other end of the spectrum, there might be a wealth of research regarding a certain topic within one country (say the US), but very little research on that same topic in a different social context (say, China).

These are just random examples, but as you can see, research gaps can emerge from many different places. What’s important to understand is that the research gap (or gaps) needs to emerge from your previous discussion of the theoretical and empirical literature . In other words, your discussion in those sections needs to start laying the foundation for the research gap.

For example, when discussing empirical research, you might mention that most studies have focused on a certain context , yet very few (or none) have focused on another context, and there’s reason to believe that findings may differ. Or you might highlight how there’s a fair deal of mixed findings and disagreement regarding a certain matter. In other words, you want to start laying a little breadcrumb trail in those sections so that your discussion of the research gap is firmly rooted in the rest of the literature review.

But why does all of this matter?

Well, the research gap should serve as the core justification for your study . Through your literature review, you’ll show what gaps exist in the current body of knowledge, and then your study will then attempt to fill (or contribute towards filling) one of those gaps. In other words, you’re first explaining what the problem is (some sort of gap) and then proposing how you’ll solve it.

Key Takeaways

To recap, the three ingredients that need to be mixed into your literature review are:

• The foundation of theory or theoretical framework
• The empirical or evidence-based research

As we mentioned earlier, these are components of a literature review and not (necessarily) a structure for your literature review chapter. Of course, you can structure your chapter in a way that reflects these three components (in fact, in some cases that works very well), but it’s certainly not the only option. The right structure will vary from study to study , depending on various factors.

If you’d like to get hands-on help developing your literature review, be sure to check out our private coaching service , where we hold your hand through the entire research journey, step by step. 

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

very good , as the first writer of the thesis i will need ur advise . please give me a piece of idea on topic -impact of national standardized exam on students learning engagement . Thank you .

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

Write Like a Scientist

A Guide to Scientific Communication

Gap Statements

  A gap is something that remains to be done or learned in an area of research; it’s a gap in the knowledge of the scientists in the field of research of your study. Every research project must, in some way, address a gap–that is, attempt to fill in some piece of information missing in the scientific literature. Otherwise, it is not novel research and is therefore not contributing to the overall goals of science.

Identify the gap.

  A gap statement is found in the Introduction section of a journal article or poster or in the Goals and Importance section of a research proposal and succinctly identifies for your audience the gap that you will attempt to address in your project.

A gap might be a lack of understanding about how well a particular instrument works in a certain situation. It could be introducing a new method that needs to be tested. Or it could be that you are studying a whole new organism, system, or part of a process. Your project may also address multiple gaps, in which case you should be sure to identify each of them clearly!

In a class, you might not always be studying something brand “new.” But, in most cases, you should still try to come up with something unique about your project, however small. Talk to your professor about what they expect for your gap statement if nothing seems to work.

Here, the authors signal to us that this is a gap because they use the words “has not yet been clarified.” Other phrases that might help you identify (or form!) a gap statement are:

• …has/have not been… (studied/reported/elucidated)
• …is required/needed…
• …the key question is/remains…
• …it is important to address…

Fill the gap.

  Once you identify the gap in the literature, you must tell your audience how you attempt to at least somewhat address in your project this lack of knowledge or understanding . In a journal article or poster, this is often done in a new paragraph and should be accomplished in one summary statement, such as:

Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the effects of lead on the hepatobiliary system, especially on the liver and on the gallbladder (adapted from Sipos et al. 2003 ).

You’ll often find that the first sentence of the last paragraph in a paper’s introduction will start somewhat like this, indicating the gap fill.  

Remember–always keep your voice professional! Colloquial phrases such as “we looked into” or “we checked if” should be avoided when introducing your gap fill.

So let’s look at this idea in context by looking at some examples from a couple of types of papers. The gap statements are underlined; the fills are italicized.  

In the second and third examples, the gap may be a little less obvious–it doesn’t use any phrases to signal to you that there’s something missing, such as “has not been clarified” or “have not been reported.” But because of the way the paragraph is laid out–following the conventions of our move structures–we can see that the underlined section of text is indeed the missing information in the literature that the group sought to address in their project.

Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.

Understanding the Seven Types of Research Gaps

DOI link for Understanding the Seven Types of Research Gaps

Click here to navigate to parent product.

The purpose of this chapter is twofold. First, the theoretical framework proposed by Miles (2017) builds on two previous models on research gaps: the five-point theoretical model of Robinson et al. (2011); and the six-point theoretical model of Müller-Bloch and Kranz (2014). Lastly, the purpose of this chapter is to develop and propose a theoretical model that is an amalgamation of the two preceding models and that reconceptualizes the research gap concepts and their characteristics. Thus, we propose a seven-point theoretical model. This chapter discusses the characteristics of each research and the situation in which its application is warranted in the literature review. This chapter ranks the research gaps often found in studies from the most common to the least common.

The significance of this chapter is twofold. First, this research provides theoretical significance by developing a theoretical model on research gaps. Second, this research attempts to build a solid taxonomy on the different characteristics of research gaps and establish a foundation. The implication here for researchers is that research gaps should be structured and characterized based on their functionality. Thus, this chapter provides researchers with a basic framework for identifying them in the literature investigation.

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Taylor & Francis Online
• Taylor & Francis Group
• Students/Researchers
• Librarians/Institutions

Connect with us

Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2024 Informa UK Limited

What is a Research Gap? How to Identify it?

“ Choosing a topic, research or subject that has not been answered or explored yet by any other scientists is referred to as a research gap.” 

Unfortunately, it’s difficult to find one! 

When you start reading literature, initially you may notice that nothing is left to study! That everyone feels, even me too when I was in my initial days of PhD. But when you get enough research experience, you can find gaps in research easily. 

“Every research is incomplete.”

Indeed, a research work completes when it states a gap or unexplored area with the final conclusion, so that future research will get direction. 

The process of research or doctorate starts (immediately after you get admission) by initiating searching a research gap which leads to postulating a research question. 

 A research question is your title or statement of thesis using which you will find your thesis objectives and address a particular question. It can be stated only by finding a research or literature gap. 

And as I said, it’s quite difficult for PhD students.  

So in this blog post, I will explain to you what a research or literature gap is and how you can identify it. 

How to appear in the PhD Interview?

What is a research or literature gap? 

Firstly, a research/ knowledge gap or literature gap is though different terms but has a similar meaning. The reason is that a research problem can be addressed either by experimental research and literature review. 

Definition: 

A research or literature gap is a problem or unexplored/ underexplored area of the existing research. 

Choosing a topic, research or subject that has not been answered or explored yet by any other scientist is referred to as a research gap. 

Let us start with an example;

Take a look at the hypothetical closing sentence.

“3 common mutations IVS1-5, IVS1-1 and CD8/9 have been selected for the present to screen thalassemia patients. A common mutation IVS1-5 has been identified in 2 out of 70 unrelated thalassemia patients using the conventional PCR technique.” 

Let’s say you want to do research on the Genetics of Thalassemia. Suppose this one is the closing paragraph of some research article and is a final conclusion. How can you find a research gap here? 

I find many gaps, Let us find out some of them;

• The sample size is too small. 
• There are 12 common mutations in beta-thalassemia which are present in almost 80% of cases. Only three are selected in the present study. 
• The present study is geologically restricted. 
• The author has used a single conventional PCR technique. More techniques like DNA sequencing can be used to address the same problem, which possibly provides more knowledge and can identify novel mutations as well. 
• The author hasn’t clarified which type of thalassemia patients they have included in the present study. 

These are some of the possible gaps in the present research. Let’s look at other closing statements for the same. 

“3 common mutations IVS1-5, IVS1-1 and CD8/9 have been selected for the present to screen thalassemia patients. A common mutation IVS1-5 has been identified in 2 out of 70 unrelated thalassemia patients using the conventional PCR technique. The present study can be strengthened by increasing sample size, diversifying geological studies, increasing the number of common mutations and using other techniques for thalassemia.”

“Major limitations of the present study are small sample size, number of mutations and technique selected for the study. 

All these closing statements posit the same type of research gaps. You can use these to prepare your thesis statement. Take a look at the one. 

“Identifying common Beta-thalassemia mutations by DNA sequencing from south India.”

Where to find a literature gap? 

Some research clearly indicates gaps in their studies whereas some don’t. And that’s why it’s difficult for students to discover one. Notedly, by looking into variables used in the study, gaps can be recognized.

• Samples- size, types, collection method, transportation conditions. 
• Research technique- single, two or multiple; significance, efficiency and accuracy of the techniques used. 
• Geological location and condition of the study conducted. 
• Objectives selected for the study.
• Data obtained and research discussions. 

You have to read tons of literature to actually determine possible gaps in the research. A research gap has been indicated in the conclusion section, final interpretation, future direction or suggestions part of a research paper. 

Besides, when you came across some phrases used in the literature such as, 

The present study has not been covered…..

………… excluded from the present study. 

………… is important to address in future research. 

…………. Techniques can be fruitful for future research. 

……………. have/has not been studied/ reported/ evaluated in the present study. 

Keep in mind that this indicates a gap, problem or scopes of improvement in the study. 

Read more: Which factors decide a PhD Salary?

How to find a research gap?

As I said, it’s not an easy process to find a problem or gap in the research, though by following some steps that I will mention here, you can find one and can go with it. 

Select a topic that you like and that motivates you: 

Research interest is important because you have to do the same work for at least 4 to 5 years. Research takes a tremendous amount of physical, mental, economical and intellectual effort. Meaning you have to select a topic that likely motivates you. You should not get tired of doing that! 

Find lucrative keywords to go ahead: 

You can’t go through the whole topic or subject, right! you have to select one or a few. Means, make things more narrow. Take a look at the process, I have explained with an example. 

Find a keyword that is relevant to the topic you like or are interested in and go ahead with it. 

Find relevant resources and literature: 

Now next in the process, type your keyword or group of keywords in the Google search box and try identifying literature, reviews and research associated with it. 

Find reviews, read them and try to find gaps in studies. Keep in mind that it will remain in your interest circle. 

Read peer-reviewed articles and find gaps in the research: 

Try to read every fresh research and review article around your topic, go through the technique and sample collection process used in each research and discover discordance or space there. 

You can make a comparative analysis table as well. Take a look at the table below, 

When you make a comparative analysis of a few studies you will get an idea about the research gap, gap in sample collection, scope to use other techniques, improvisation or new research areas to include in the study. 

Choosing one from many: 

When you complete the process, you may find many unanswered questions or research gaps (if you have done things in this manner) and you get stuck with many, which to choose and which to leave. 

For PhD, it’s important to weightage a research work accurately; not more, not less. An imbalance will create an unnecessary burden and create problems in the future. 

Henceforth, prioritizing and narrowing down the research gap is crucial. 

In this case, you can take your supervisor’s help. Postulate an amazing research question that would be suitable for PhD, as per your interest, under your budget and fulfill your supervisor’s need. 

Expected outcomes: 

This is confusing for you surely! 

You may wonder by only identifying a gap and postulating a research question, how can we expect anything as outcomes? 

Expected outcomes of the research have significant value and importance in the PhD, PhD research proposal and your final report. You or your guide has to explain the possible results of the study. 

It’s mandatory and will give you direction for research. Expected outcomes can be considered as a path on which you will have to walk. 

Take an example of the research question we just postulated, “Identifying common Beta-thalassemia mutations by DNA sequencing from south India.”

What will be the expected results? 

• You will get some common mutations. 
• You will probably get some new mutations or variations. 
• Or you will get nothing, which means, no mutations in any samples. 

In either case, you have definite outcomes, and your final results will be around it, perhaps. You will definitely not get any information regarding the globin protein because that’s not included in the study. 

Right! 

You are just doing mutational analysis and want to find some common mutations in the selected population. So what research gap you will identify will surely give some expected outcomes. 

Wrapping up: 

Research gap/ knowledge gap or literature gap all terms leads us to the same direction and help us to propose a research question. Although as we said, expected outcomes are also an important consideration to fill the gap. 

If you are new to PhD or just started this article is the best place for you to start, and will definitely assist you to find a mission piece of link in the research. 

I hope you like this article. Please do visit other articles on this blog. 

Dr. Tushar Chauhan is a Scientist, Blogger and Scientific-writer. He has completed PhD in Genetics. Dr. Chauhan is a PhD coach and tutor.

Share this:

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on Pinterest
• Share on Linkedin
• Share via Email

About The Author

Dr Tushar Chauhan

Related posts.

What is PhD?- History, Definition, Origin, Requirement, Fees, Duration and Process

How to write a PhD thesis?

Leave 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.

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

How do I find a research gap for my thesis?

If you are just starting your bachelor’s or master’s thesis, chances are you have heard about finding a “research gap.” In this blog, we will explain what a research gap is, the four most common types of research gaps, and how to identify a suitable research gap.

What is a research gap?

A research gap refers to an unanswered question or unresolved problem in a field of study, indicating a lack of existing research in that area. A research gap can also exist when a substantial amount of existing research has been conducted, but the findings of the studies point in different directions. For example, suppose your research focuses on identifying the cause (or causes) of a specific disease. Upon reviewing the literature, you find that certain studies conclude that cigarette smoking is a significant factor. However, you also come across numerous studies that find no association between smoking and the disease. In such a case, you may be dealing with a research gap.

The different types of research gaps We distinguish four most common types of research gaps:

• The classical research gap
• The disagreement research gap
• The contextual research gap (most popular among thesis writers!)

The methodological research gap

1. the classical research gap.

This research gap occurs when there is a new concept or phenomenon that has not been extensively studied or not at all. For example, when a new social media platform is launched, there is an opportunity to explore its impact on users, how it can be used for marketing, its influence on society, and so on. The same applies to new technologies, new communication tools, new therapies, etc. Always try to delimit your research well. For a thesis, investigating an entirely new therapy, for example, is often too broad and extensive. Also, keep in mind that you will need to rely on adjacent literature to build your literature review. You won’t find many existing studies directly related to your topic.

2. The disagreement research gap

As the name suggests, the disagreement research gap arises when there are conflicting or contradictory findings in the existing research regarding a specific research question. The example we described above about the causes of a disease is an example of this type of research gap. Importantly, for this type of research gap, there must be different conflicting findings. In other words, a situation where 95% of the articles find one result and 5% find the opposite result would not really constitute a disagreement in the literature.

3. The contextual research gap

The third type of research gap is the contextual gap. Simply put, a contextual research gap exists when you find a considerable amount of existing research on a specific topic, but there is a lack of research in specific contexts. This could include:

• A specific population – perhaps a certain age group, gender, or ethnicity.
• A geographic area – for example, a city, country, or region.
• A particular time period – maybe most studies were conducted many years or even decades ago, and the landscape has changed.

Many thesis students choose this type of research gap because it allows them to base their research on existing literature and possibly even use existing questionnaires. It is important to clearly justify in your thesis why you expect differences in the specific context you choose. Make sure you can explain clearly why your chosen context is “different” from existing studies and why it could reasonably lead to different findings.

As the name suggests, this type of research gap arises due to the research methodology or design of existing studies. You may conclude that the methodology of existing studies is somehow inadequate or that they lack a certain perspective. For example, you may describe that the majority of existing research has adopted a quantitative approach and that there is, therefore, a lack of insight that a qualitative study could provide. Alternatively, you could describe that existing studies have mainly provided a snapshot of the situation, while a longitudinal approach could help uncover how variables have changed over time.

How to find a research gap?

Now that you have a clearer understanding of the different types of research gaps, the next question is, of course, “how do you find these research gaps?” Here, we describe a basic two-step strategy to help you find the research gap.

As a starting point, you need to gather as much recent literature reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis articles as possible that relate to your topic. It is also a good idea to look at recent dissertations. There are several databases that share dissertations (such as OATD – Open Access Theses and Dissertations). Make sure to review the most recent sources possible; otherwise, the research gaps you find may have already been filled by other researchers. Once you have collected a substantial number of articles, focus on reading the discussion section and pay attention to anything they mention about “future research.” In the discussion, researchers will explicitly indicate areas where further studies are needed – in other words, your potential research gap. You can also look for the “limitations” they describe, as this often provides ideas for the methodological research gap. By following this process, you familiarize yourself with the current state of research, which will lay the foundation for identifying the research gap.

Tip: Go on a “FRIN hunt.” FRIN stands for “further research is needed.” Once you have found several relevant articles, search for specific keywords:

• Future research
• Further research
• Research opportunities
• Research directions

These terms are often found in what we call the “FRIN” section. Some articles have a dedicated FRIN section or paragraph, or they are mentioned in the discussion.

We wish you success in finding the research gap! If you need any assistance or have other questions, feel free to ask.

Topscriptie has already helped more than 6,000 students!

Let us help you with your studies or graduation. Discover what we can do for you.

Call or WhatsApp a thesis supervisor

Winner of the best thesis agency in the Netherlands

How to identify research gaps and include them in your thesis?

A thesis is an investigation that adheres to the principles of academic writing . It is critically evaluated on its reliability and significance for the industry (Chandra, 2017). The thesis research provides new insights into academia by reviewing existing research.

In this process, it is essential to identify the research gap. Research gaps are the centre of any research, determining the areas which lack crucial information.

Research gaps also help to frame:

The purpose of identifying research gaps in a thesis

A research gap is a problem that has not been addressed or answered in previous studies in the form of books, journal articles or reports. For instance, presently, there is a lack of research on the long-term effects of the Covid-19 vaccine. This can be a research gap in many studies such as social sciences, biotechnology, and medicine. Such problems need citation analysis and systematic review (Tsoulfas, 2021). To formulate an information-driven thesis, it is important to recognize the area or the topic that is unexplored or has insufficient information. Often research gaps in a thesis are confused with research questions and problem statements. However, there are fundamental differences in these concepts. The sole purpose of a research gap is to summarise problems with outdated or primitive studies. It is a part of the thesis introduction chapter and can range from 200 to 1000 words in length.

How to devote a section for research gaps in a thesis?

The first step in preparing the research gaps section is to outline the general state of knowledge and research in the field of study. This step helps in building the outline for the aspects that could be relevant to the research field.

The second step involves a thorough reading of earlier research and publication on the topic. For this, the researcher can refer to journal articles, library books, or reports. This step also involves consulting your supervisor.

Further, as per the reviewed articles, a viewpoint about the given topic must be framed by listing all relevant information.

Lastly, the need or significance of addressing the listed gaps should be presented.

Start the research gaps in a thesis with a summary of existing research findings. It does not need a detailed elaboration of the situation. For instance, statistics can be skipped. Similarly, you do not need to explain concepts or theories in this section. Next, state the limitations or lacuna in the area of research. This section needs more elaboration like who, what, when, where, why and how should be discussed. Each gap must be stated separately. For instance, consider these 3 gaps:

• there is a lack of research in your country’s context,
• there is a lack of empirical evidence and,
• there is a lack of consensus,

each should be explained separately. It should be structured in the form of citations wherever necessary. The writing pattern should move from generic to specific thus targeting the research problem for the thesis.

Points to avoid

• Too much description and analysis of the previously done studies must be avoided to keep the thesis research gap indicative and emblematic.
• Avoid giving too much statistical information.
• Avoid not reading enough. Identifying a research gap needs thorough reading, not skimping through facts.
• Avoid failing to accurately identify the need for further study and the lack of a persuasive framework for the identification of the research gap.
• Avoid not using enough citations for supporting the identified lacuna.
• Avoid not stating the significance of the identified gaps.

An example of research gaps in a thesis

Case topic: Impact of transformative heritage destinations on changing personal values of tourists

Travel behaviour today has shifted from global consumerism to a more meaningful and personalized experience. This has amplified the demand for heritage tourism, i.e. the movement of a person to places of cultural attraction away from their normal residential place to gain new experiences and information for satisfying cultural needs (G Richards, 2003; Rosenfeld, 2008). Tourists are also seeking transformative travel experiences which lead to positive changes in their values and attitudes. PineII & Gilmore (1999) have identified that heritage tourism is responding towards fulfilling the transformation needs of tourists. However, the lack of empirical evidence on the contribution of transformative heritage tourism in changing the personal values of tourists is restricting the formulation of strategies that can boost its growth.

Moreover, researchers have determined that authenticity, awareness, nostalgia, and satisfaction have a relationship with transformative effects and heritage tourism. Therefore, these factors may be interlinked. But despite this, not many academic studies have focused on addressing these tourist factors’ impact on the linkage between heritage tourism and transformative effect. This is another critical research gap.

• Chandra. (2017). How to Write a Thesis : A Working Guide . Retrieved from https://www.student.uwa.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/1919239/How-to-write-a-thesis-A-working-guide.pdf
• Oulu. (2012). GUIDELINES FOR WRITING A THESIS . Retrieved from https://www.oulu.fi/sites/default/files/content/Guidelines.pdf
• Pubrica. (2021). Framework for the Identirication Of the Research Gap. Retrieved September 30, 2021, from Pubrica website: http://pubrica.com/academy/uncategorized/a-framework-for-the-identification-of-the-research-gap/
• Tsoulfas, G. (2021). The Importance of Research. Journal of the American College of Surgeons , 232 (5), 680–681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2021.02.003
• Priya Chetty

I am a management graduate with specialisation in Marketing and Finance. I have over 12 years' experience in research and analysis. This includes fundamental and applied research in the domains of management and social sciences. I am well versed with academic research principles. Over the years i have developed a mastery in different types of data analysis on different applications like SPSS, Amos, and NVIVO. My expertise lies in inferring the findings and creating actionable strategies based on them. 

Over the past decade I have also built a profile as a researcher on Project Guru's Knowledge Tank division. I have penned over 200 articles that have earned me 400+ citations so far. My Google Scholar profile can be accessed here . 

I now consult university faculty through Faculty Development Programs (FDPs) on the latest developments in the field of research. I also guide individual researchers on how they can commercialise their inventions or research findings. Other developments im actively involved in at Project Guru include strengthening the "Publish" division as a bridge between industry and academia by bringing together experienced research persons, learners, and practitioners to collaboratively work on a common goal. 

I am a Senior Analyst at Project Guru, a research and analytics firm based in Gurugram since 2012. I hold a master’s degree in economics from Amity University (2019). Over 4 years, I have worked on worked on various research projects using a range of research tools like SPSS, STATA, VOSViewer, Python, EVIEWS, and NVIVO. My core strength lies in data analysis related to Economics, Accounting, and Financial Management fields.

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

proofreading

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

Identifying the gap

Research involves highlighting the questions that remain unanswered in your area of research. This is often referred to as ‘identifying the gap’ in the literature and tells the reader what areas need further investigation in your research area. Identifying ‘the gap’ in your research is fundamental to finding your position in an ongoing conversation by deciding how much you accept, question, or reject the claims that your sources make.

When you start to write about that research, you need to figure out how to signal that position, as you quote, summarize, or paraphrase from your sources.

Read the following text and note the way the researcher identifies the gap in the research as a way of positioning themselves in the research field.

This research project sets out to discover if an experience of Antarctica, specifically mine, could be interpreted through the creation of souvenirs and jewellery. Although Antarctica is considered to be a very remote place it has a long and significant history of science and exploration and most recently has become the destination for tourism [a] . However, unlike most tourist destinations Antarctica has not been memorialised through jewellery and souvenirs in the way of historic tourist locations in the world [b]. Throughout Antarctica’s history explorers have painted images and more recently documented it through photography [c] . Whalers and fishermen have made their own representations of this isolated and uninhabited continent, however, none of these matches the proliferation of souvenirs that have been produced to provide memories and reminders of Europe for example during the times of the Grand Tour or the commonly available souvenirs of popular resorts, sites and locations today [d] .

Excerpt from Kirsten Haydon’s dissertation  Antarctic landscapes in the souvenir and jewellery  (used with permission)

Check your understanding

Research and Writing Skills for Academic and Graduate Researchers Copyright © 2022 by RMIT University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Gen Intern Med
• v.37(1); 2022 Jan

Methods for Identifying Health Research Gaps, Needs, and Priorities: a Scoping Review

Eunice c. wong.

1 RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA USA

Alicia R. Maher

Aneesa motala.

2 Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California Gehr Family Center for Health Systems Science & Innovation, Los Angeles, USA

Rachel Ross

Olamigoke akinniranye, jody larkin, susanne hempel, associated data.

Well-defined, systematic, and transparent processes to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities are vital to ensuring that available funds target areas with the greatest potential for impact.

The purpose of this review is to characterize methods conducted or supported by research funding organizations to identify health research gaps, needs, or priorities.

We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science up to September 2019. Eligible studies reported on methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities that had been conducted or supported by research funding organizations. Using a published protocol, we extracted data on the method, criteria, involvement of stakeholders, evaluations, and whether the method had been replicated (i.e., used in other studies).

Among 10,832 citations, 167 studies were eligible for full data extraction. More than half of the studies employed methods to identify both needs and priorities, whereas about a quarter of studies focused singularly on identifying gaps (7%), needs (6%), or priorities (14%) only. The most frequently used methods were the convening of workshops or meetings (37%), quantitative methods (32%), and the James Lind Alliance approach, a multi-stakeholder research needs and priority setting process (28%). The most widely applied criteria were importance to stakeholders (72%), potential value (29%), and feasibility (18%). Stakeholder involvement was most prominent among clinicians (69%), researchers (66%), and patients and the public (59%). Stakeholders were identified through stakeholder organizations (51%) and purposive (26%) and convenience sampling (11%). Only 4% of studies evaluated the effectiveness of the methods and 37% employed methods that were reproducible and used in other studies.

To ensure optimal targeting of funds to meet the greatest areas of need and maximize outcomes, a much more robust evidence base is needed to ascertain the effectiveness of methods used to identify research gaps, needs, and priorities.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11606-021-07064-1.

Well-defined, systematic, and transparent methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities are vital to ensuring that available funds target areas with the greatest potential for impact. 1 , 2 As defined in the literature, 3 , 4 research gaps are defined as areas or topics in which the ability to draw a conclusion for a given question is prevented by insufficient evidence. Research gaps are not necessarily synonymous with research needs , which are those knowledge gaps that significantly inhibit the decision-making ability of key stakeholders, who are end users of research, such as patients, clinicians, and policy makers. The selection of research priorities is often necessary when all identified research gaps or needs cannot be pursued because of resource constraints. Methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities (from herein referred to as gaps, needs, priorities) can be multi-varied and there does not appear to be general consensus on best practices. 3 , 5

Several published reviews highlight the diverse methods that have been used to identify gaps and priorities. In a review of methods used to identify gaps from systematic reviews, Robinson et al. noted the wide range of organizing principles that were employed in published literature between 2001 and 2009 (e.g., care pathway, decision tree, and patient, intervention, comparison, outcome framework,). 6 In a more recent review spanning 2007 to 2017, Nyanchoka et al. found that the vast majority of studies with a primary focus on the identification of gaps (83%) relied solely on knowledge synthesis methods (e.g., systematic review, scoping review, evidence mapping, literature review). A much smaller proportion (9%) relied exclusively on primary research methods (i.e., quantitative survey, qualitative study). 7

With respect to research priorities, in a review limited to a PubMed database search covering the period from 2001 to 2014, Yoshida documented a wide range of methods to identify priorities including the use of not only knowledge synthesis (i.e., literature reviews) and primary research methods (i.e., surveys) but also multi-stage, structured methods such as Delphi, Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI), James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership (JLA PSP), and Essential National Health Research (ENHR). 2 The CHNRI method, originally developed for the purpose of setting global child health research priorities, typically employs researchers and experts to specify a long list of research questions, the criteria that will be used to prioritize research questions, and the technical scoring of research questions using the defined criteria. 8 During the latter stages, non-expert stakeholders’ input are incorporated by using their ratings of the importance of selected criteria to weight the technical scores. The ENHR method, initially designed for health research priority setting at the national level, involves researchers, decision-makers, health service providers, and communities throughout the entire process of identifying and prioritizing research topics. 9 The JLA PSP method convenes patients, carers, and clinicians to equally and jointly identify questions about healthcare that cannot be answered by existing evidence that are important to all groups (i.e., research needs). 10 The identified research needs are then prioritized by the groups resulting in a final list (often a top 10) of research priorities. Non-clinical researchers are excluded from voting on research needs or priorities but can be involved in other processes (e.g., knowledge synthesis). CHNRI, ENHR, and JLA PSP usually employ a mix of knowledge synthesis and primary research methods to first identify a set of gaps or needs that are then prioritized. Thus, even though CHNRI, ENHR, and JLA PSP have been referred to as priority setting methods, they actually consist of a gaps or needs identification stage that feeds into a research prioritization stage.

Nyanchoka et al.’s review found that the majority of studies focused on the identification of gaps alone (65%), whereas the remaining studies focused either on research priorities alone (17%) or on both gaps and priorities (19%). 7 In an update to Robinson et al.’s review, 6 Carey et al. reviewed the literature between 2010 and 2011 and observed that the studies conducted during this latter period of time focused more on research priorities than gaps and had increased stakeholder involvement, and that none had evaluated the reproducibility of the methods. 11

The increasing development and diversity of formal processes and methods to identify gaps and priorities are indicative of a developing field. 2 , 12 To facilitate more standardized and systematic processes, other important areas warrant further investigation. Prior reviews did not distinguish between the identification of gaps versus research needs. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center (AHRQ EPC) Program issued a series of method papers related to establishing research needs as part of comparative effectiveness research. 13 – 15 The AHRQ EPC Program defined research needs as “evidence gaps” identified within systematic reviews that are prioritized by stakeholders according to their potential impact on practice or care. 16 Furthermore, Nyanchoka et al. relied on author designations to classify studies as focusing on gaps versus research priorities and noted that definitions of gaps varied across studies, highlighting the need to apply consistent taxonomy when categorizing studies in reviews. 7 Given the rise in the use of stakeholders in both gaps and prioritization exercises, a greater understanding of the range of practices involving stakeholders is also needed. This includes the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders (e.g., consultants versus final decision-makers), the composition of stakeholders (e.g., non-research clinicians, patients, caregivers, policymakers), and the methods used to recruit stakeholders. The lack of consensus of best practices also highlights the importance of learning the extent to which evaluations to determine the effectiveness of gaps, needs, and prioritization exercises have been conducted, and if so, what were the resultant outcomes.

To better inform efforts and organizations that fund health research, we conducted a scoping review of methods used to identify gaps, needs, and priorities that were linked to potential or actual health research funding decision-making. Hence, this scoping review was limited to studies in which the identification of health research gaps, needs, or priorities was supported or conducted by funding organizations to address the following questions 1 : What are the characteristics of methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities? and 2 To what extent have evaluations of the impact of these methods been conducted? Given that scoping reviews may be executed to characterize the ways an area of research has been conducted, 17 , 18 this approach is appropriate for the broad nature of this study’s aims.

Protocol and Registration

We employed methods that conform to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. 19 See Appendix A in the Supplementary Information. The scoping review protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/5zjqx/ ).

Eligibility Criteria

Studies published in English that described methods to identify health research gaps, needs, or priorities that were supported or conducted by funding organizations were eligible for inclusion. We excluded studies that reported only the results of the exercise (e.g., list of priorities) absent of information on the methods used. We also excluded studies involving evidence synthesis (e.g., literature or systematic reviews) that were solely descriptive and did not employ an explicit method to identify research gaps, needs, or priorities.

Information Sources and Search Strategy

We searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Our database search also included an update of the Nyanchoka et al. scoping review, which entailed executing their database searches for the time period following 2017 (the study’s search end date). 7 Nyanchoka et al. did not include database searches for research needs. The electronic database search and scoping review update were completed in August and September 2019, respectively . The search strategy employed for each of the databases is presented in Appendix B in the Supplementary Information.

Selection of Sources of Evidence and Data Charting Process

Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts and full-text publications. Citations that one or both reviewers considered potentially eligible were retrieved for full-text review. Relevant background articles and scoping and systematic reviews were reference mined to screen for eligible studies. Full-text publications were screened against detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data was extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion by the review team.

Information on study characteristics were extracted from each article including the aims of the exercise (i.e., gaps, needs, priorities, or a combination) and health condition (i.e., physical or psychological). Based on definitions in the literature, 3 – 5 the aims of the exercise were coded according to the activities that were conducted, which may not have always corresponded with the study authors’ labeling of the exercises. For instance, the JLA PSP method is often described as a priority exercise but we categorized it as a needs and priority exercise. Priority exercises can be preceded by exercises to identify gaps or needs, which then feed into the priority exercise such as in JLA PSP; however, standalone priority exercises can also be conducted (e.g., stakeholders prioritize an existing list of emerging diseases).

For each type of exercise, information on the methods were recorded. An initial list of methods was created based on previous reviews. 9 , 12 , 20 During the data extraction process, any methods not included in the initial list were subsequently added. If more than one exercise was reported within an article (e.g., gaps and priorities), information was extracted for each exercise separately. Reviewers extracted the following information: methods employed (e.g., qualitative, quantitative), criteria used (e.g., disease burden, importance to stakeholders), stakeholder involvement (e.g., stakeholder composition, method for identifying stakeholders), and whether an evaluation was conducted on the effectiveness of the exercise (see Appendix C in the Supplementary Information for full data extraction form).

Synthesis of results entailed quantitative descriptives of study characteristics (e.g., proportion of studies by aims of exercise) and characteristics of methods employed across all studies and by each type of study (e.g., gaps, needs, priorities).

The electronic database search yielded a total of 10,548 titles. Another 284 articles were identified after searching the reference lists of full-text publications, including three systematic reviews 21 – 23 and one scoping review 24 that had met eligibility criteria. Moreover, a total of 99 publications designated as relevant background articles were also reference mined to screen for eligible studies. We conducted full-text screening for 2524 articles, which resulted in 2344 exclusions (440 studies were designated as background articles). A total of 167 exercises related to the identification of gaps, needs, or priorities that were supported or conducted by a research funding organization were described across 180 publications and underwent full data extraction. See Figure ​ Figure1 1 for the flow diagram of our search strategy and reasons for exclusion.

Literature flow

Characteristics of Sources of Evidence

Among the published exercises, the majority of studies (152/167) conducted gaps, need, or prioritization exercises related to physical health, whereas only a small fraction of studies focused on psychological health (12/167) (see Appendix D in the Supplementary Information).

Methods for Identifying Gaps, Needs, and Priorities

As seen in Table ​ Table1, 1 , only about a quarter of studies involved a singular type of exercise with 7% focused on the identification of gaps only (i.e., areas with insufficient information to draw a conclusion for a given question), 6% on needs only (i.e., knowledge gaps that inhibit the decision-making of key stakeholders), and 14% priorities only (i.e., ranked gaps or needs often because of resource constraints). Studies more commonly conducted a combination of multiple types of exercises with more than half focused on the identification of both research needs and priorities, 14% on gaps and priorities, 3% gaps, needs, and priorities, and 3% gaps and needs.

Methods for Identifying Health Research Gaps, Needs, and Priorities

JLA PSP , James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnerships; ENHR , Essential National Health Research; CHNRI , Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative. Numbers in columns may add up to more than the total N or 100% since some studies employed more than one method

Across the 167 studies, the three most frequently used methods were the convening of workshops/meetings/conferences (37%), quantitative methods (32%), and the JLA PSP approach (28%). This was followed by methods involving literature reviews (17%), qualitative methods (17%), consensus methods (13%), and reviews of source materials (15%). Other methods included the CHNRI process (7%), reviews of in-progress data (7%), consultation with (non-researcher) stakeholders (4%), applying a framework tool (4%), ENHR (1%), systematic reviews (1%), and evidence mapping (1%).

The criterion most widely applied across the 167 studies was the importance to stakeholders (72%) (see Table ​ Table2). 2 ). Almost one-third (29%) considered the potential value and 18% feasibility as criteria. Burden of disease (9%), addressing inequities (8%), costs (6%), alignment with organization’s mission (3%), and patient centeredness (2%) were adopted as criteria to a lesser extent.

Criteria for Identifying Health Research Gaps, Needs, and Priorities

Numbers in columns may add up to more than the total N or 100% since some studies employed more than one criterion

About two-thirds of the studies included researchers (66%) and clinicians (69%) as stakeholders (see Appendix E in the Supplementary Information). Patients and the public were involved in 59% of the studies. A smaller proportion included policy makers (20%), funders (13%), product makers (8%), payers (5%), and purchasers (2%) as stakeholders. Nearly half of the studies (51%) relied on stakeholder organizations to identify stakeholders (see Appendix F in the Supplementary Information). A quarter of studies (26%) used purposive sampling and some convenience sampling (11%). Few (9%) used snowball sampling to identify stakeholders. Only a minor fraction of studies, seven of the 167 (4%), reported some type of effectiveness evaluation. 25 – 31

Our scoping review revealed that approaches to identifying gaps, needs, and priorities are less likely to occur as discrete processes and more often involve a combination of exercises. Approaches encompassing multiple exercises (e.g., gaps and needs) were far more prevalent than singular standalone exercises (e.g., gaps only) (73% vs. 27%). Findings underscore the varying importance placed on gaps, needs, and priorities, which reflect key principles of the Value of Information approach (i.e., not all gaps are important, addressing gaps do not necessarily address needs nor does addressing needs necessarily address priorities). 32

Findings differ from Nyanchoka et al.’s review in which studies involving the identification of gaps only outnumbered studies involving both gaps and priorities. 7 However, Nyanchoka et al. relied on author definitions to categorize exercises, whereas our study made designations based on our review of the activities described in the article and applied definitions drawn from the literature. 3 , 4 Lack of consensus on definitions of gaps and priority setting has been noted in the literature. 33 , 34 To the authors’ knowledge, no prior scoping review has focused on methods related to the identification of “research needs.” Findings underscore the need to develop and apply more consistent taxonomy to this growing field of research.

More than 40% of studies employed methods with a structured protocol including JLA PSP, ENHR, CHRNI, World Café, and the Dialogue model. 10 , 35 – 40 The World Café and Dialogue models particularly value the experiential perspectives of stakeholders. The World Café centers on creating a special environment, often modeled after a café, in which rounds of multi-stakeholder, small group, conversations are facilitated and prefaced with questions designed for the specific purpose of the session. Insights and results are reported and shared back to the entire group with no expectation to achieve consensus, but rather diverse perspectives are encouraged. 36 The Dialogue model is a multi-stakeholder, participatory, priority setting method involving the following phases: exploratory (informal discussions), consultation (separate stakeholder consultations), prioritization (stakeholder ratings), and integration (dialog between stakeholders). 39 Findings may indicate a trend away from non-replicable methods to approaches that afford greater transparency and reproducibility. 41 For instance, of the 17 studies published between 2000 and 2009, none had employed CHNRI and 6% used JLA PSP compared to the 141 studies between 2010 and 2019 in which 8% applied CHNRI and 32% JLA PSP. However, notable variations in implementing CHNRI and JLA PSP have been observed. 41 – 43 Though these protocols help to ensure a more standardized process, which is essential when testing the effectiveness of methods, such evaluations are infrequent but necessary to establish the usefulness of replicable methods.

Convening workshops, meetings, or conferences was the method used by the greatest proportion of studies (37%). The operationalization of even this singular method varied widely in duration (e.g., single vs. multi-day conferences), format (e.g., expert panel presentations, breakout discussion groups), processes (e.g., use of formal/informal consensus methods), and composition of stakeholders. The operationalization of other methods (e.g., quantitative, qualitative) also exhibited great diversity.

The use of explicit criteria to determine gaps, needs, or priorities is a key component of certain structured protocols 40 , 44 and frameworks. 9 , 45 In our scoping review, the criterion applied most frequently across studies (71%) was “importance to stakeholders” followed by potential value (31%) and feasibility (18%). Stakeholder values are being incorporated into the identification of gaps, needs, and exercises across a significant proportion of studies, but how this is operationalized varies widely across studies. For instance, the CHNRI typically employs multiple criteria that are scored by technical experts and these scores are then weighted based on stakeholder ratings of their relative importance. Other studies totaled scores across multiple criteria, whereas JLA PSP asks multiple stakeholders to rank the top ten priorities. The importance of involving stakeholders, especially patients and the public, in priority setting is increasingly viewed as vital to ensuring the needs of end users are met, 46 , 47 particularly in light of evidence demonstrating mismatches between the research interests of patients and researchers and clinicians. 48 – 50 In our review, clinicians (69%) and researchers (66%) were the most widely represented stakeholder groups across studies. Patients and the public (e.g., caregivers) were included as stakeholders in 59% of the studies. Only a small fraction of studies involved exercises in which stakeholders were limited to researchers only. Patients and the public were involved as stakeholders in 12% of studies published between 2000 and 2009 compared to 60% of studies between 2010 and 2019. Findings may reflect a trend away from researchers traditionally serving as one of the sole drivers of determining which research topics should be pursued.

More than half of the studies reported relying on stakeholder organizations to identify participants. Partnering with stakeholder organizations has been noted as one of the primary methods for identifying stakeholders for priority setting exercises. 34 Purposive sampling was the next most frequently used stakeholder identification method. In contrast, convenience sampling (e.g., recommendations by study team) and snowball sampling (e.g., identified stakeholders refer other stakeholders who then refer additional stakeholders) were not as frequently employed, but were documented as common methods in a prior review conducted almost a decade ago. 14 The greater use of stakeholder organizations than convenience or snowball sampling may be partly due to the more recent proliferation of published studies using structured protocols like JLA PSP, which rely heavily on partnerships with stakeholder organizations. Though methods such as snowball sampling may introduce more bias than random sampling, 14 there are no established best practices for stakeholder identification methods. 51 Nearly a quarter of studies provided either unclear or no information on stakeholder identification methods, which has been documented as a barrier to comparing across studies and assessing the validity of research priorities. 34

Determining the effectiveness of gaps, needs, and priority exercises is challenging given that outcome evaluations are rarely conducted. Only seven studies reported conducting an evaluation. 25 – 31 Evaluations varied with respect to their focus on process- (e.g., balanced stakeholder representation, stakeholder satisfaction) versus outcome-related impact (e.g., prioritized topics funded, knowledge production, benefits to health). There is no consensus on what constitutes optimal outcomes, which has been found to vary by discipline. 52

More than 90% of studies involved exercises related to physical health in contrast to a minor portfolio of work being dedicated to psychological health, which may be an indication of the low priority placed on psychological health policy research. Understanding whether funding decisions for physical versus psychological health research are similarly or differentially governed by more systematic, formal processes may be important to the extent that this affects the effective targeting of funds.

Limitations

By limiting studies to those supported or conducted by funding organizations, we may have excluded global, national, or local priority setting exercises. In addition, our scoping review categorized approaches according to the actual exercises conducted and definitions provided in the scientific literature rather than relying on the terminology employed by studies. This resulted in instances in which the category assigned to an exercise within our scoping review could diverge from the category employed by the study authors. Lastly, this study’s findings are subject to limitations often characteristic of scoping reviews such as publication bias, language bias, lack of quality assessment, and search, inclusion, and extraction biases. 53

Conclusions

The diversity and growing establishment of formal processes and methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities are characteristic of a developing field. Even with the emergence of more structured and systematic approaches, the inconsistent categorization and definition of gaps, needs, and priorities inhibit efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of varied methods and processes, such efforts are rare and sorely needed to build an evidence base to guide best practices. The immense variation occurring within structured protocols, across different combinations of disparate methods, and even within singular methods, further emphasizes the importance of using clearly defined approaches, which are essential to conducting investigations of the effectiveness of these varied approaches. The recent development of reporting guidelines for priority setting for health research may facilitate more consistent and clear documentation of processes and methods, which includes the many facets of involving stakeholders. 34 To ensure optimal targeting of funds to meet the greatest areas of need and maximize outcomes, a much more robust evidence base is needed to ascertain the effectiveness of methods used to identify research gaps, needs, and priorities.

(PDF 1205 kb)

Acknowledgements

This scoping review is part of research that was sponsored by Defense Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury (now Psychological Health Center of Excellence).

Publisher’s Note

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

•   [email protected]
• Shapiro Library
• SNHU Library Frequently Asked Questions

FAQ: What is a research gap and how do I find one?

• 7 Academic Integrity & Plagiarism
• 61 Academic Support, Writing Help, & Presentation Help
• 28 Access/Remote Access
• 7 Accessibility
• 8 Building/Facilities
• 6 Career/Job Information
• 25 Catalog/Print Books
• 25 Circulation
• 134 Citing Sources
• 14 Copyright
• 306 Databases
• 23 Directions/Location
• 19 Faculty Resources/Needs
• 7 Hours/Contacts
• 2 Innovation Lab & Makerspace/3D Printing
• 25 Interlibrary Loan
• 43 IT/Computer/Printing Support
• 3 Library Instruction
• 37 Library Technology Help
• 6 Multimedia
• 16 Online Programs
• 20 Periodicals
• 24 Policies
• 8 RefWorks/Citation Managers
• 4 Research Guides (LibGuides)
• 213 Research Help
• 22 University Services

Last Updated: Aug 26, 2024 Views: 498874

What is a research gap.

A research gap is a question or a problem that has not been answered by any of the existing studies or research within your field. Sometimes, a research gap exists when there is a concept or new idea that hasn't been studied at all. Sometimes you'll find a research gap if all the existing research is outdated and in need of new/updated research (studies on Internet use in 2001, for example). Or, perhaps a specific population has not been well studied (perhaps there are plenty of studies on teenagers and video games, but not enough studies on toddlers and video games, for example). These are just a few examples, but any research gap you find is an area where more studies and more research need to be conducted. Please view this video clip from our Sage Research Methods database for more helpful information: How Do You Identify Gaps in Literature?

How do I find one?

It will take a lot of research and reading.  You'll need to be very familiar with all the studies that have already been done, and what those studies contributed to the overall body of knowledge about that topic. Make a list of any questions you have about your topic and then do some research to see if those questions have already been answered satisfactorily. If they haven't, perhaps you've discovered a gap!  Here are some strategies you can use to make the most of your time:

• One useful trick is to look at the “suggestions for future research” or conclusion section of existing studies on your topic. Many times, the authors will identify areas where they think a research gap exists, and what studies they think need to be done in the future.
• As you are researching, you will most likely come across citations for seminal works in your research field. These are the research studies that you see mentioned again and again in the literature.  In addition to finding those and reading them, you can use a database like Web of Science to follow the research trail and discover all the other articles that have cited these. See the FAQ: I found the perfect article for my paper. How do I find other articles and books that have cited it? on how to do this. One way to quickly track down these seminal works is to use a database like SAGE Navigator, a social sciences literature review tool. It is one of the products available via our SAGE Knowledge database.
• In the PsycINFO and PsycARTICLES databases, you can select literature review, systematic review, and meta analysis under the Methodology section in the advanced search to quickly locate these. See the FAQ: Where can I find a qualitative or quantitative study? for more information on how to find the Methodology section in these two databases.
• In CINAHL , you can select Systematic review under the Publication Type field in the advanced search. 
• In Web of Science , check the box beside Review under the Document Type heading in the “Refine Results” sidebar to the right of the list of search hits.
• If the database you are searching does not offer a way to filter your results by document type, publication type, or methodology in the advanced search, you can include these phrases (“literature reviews,” meta-analyses, or “systematic reviews”) in your search string.  For example, “video games” AND “literature reviews” could be a possible search that you could try.

Please give these suggestions a try and contact a librarian for additional assistance.

Content authored by: GS

• Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 401 No 155

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) are a self-serve option for users to search and find answers to their questions. 

Use the search box above to type your question to search for an answer or browse existing FAQs by group, topic, etc.

Tell Me More

Link to Question Form

More assistance.

Submit a Question

Related FAQs

• Mardigian Library
• Subject Guides

Advanced Psychology Research Guide

• Identify Research Gaps
• Online Library Access
• Start Finding Sources
• Search PsycINFO/PsycARTICLES
• Search Psychology Databases
• Find/Browse ebooks
• Find Datasets
• Your Thesis Proposal
• What Do Thesis Projects Involve?
• Develop A Hypothesis
• Identify/Justify Methods & Populations
• Identify/Justify/Find Tests
• Read & Analyze Your Articles
• Select Your Sources
• Use Your Sources
• Avoid Plagiarism
• Write & Cite in APA (7th ed.)
• Manage Your Sources & Citations
• Apply for Research Funding
• Publish Your Research
• Graduate Students
• Browse Master's Theses
• Browse Honors Theses
• Browse Journals
• Use Interlibrary Loan This link opens in a new window

Nadine Anderson, Behavioral Sciences and Women's & Gender Studies Librarian

Steps for identifying research gaps in the literature

Your Master's thesis should make a significant, novel contribution to the field. Your thesis hypothesis should address a  research gap which you identify in the literature, a research question or problem that has not been answered in your research area of interest. This shows that you have developed expertise in the body of knowledge and theoretical issues in your chosen research area. 

Step 1: Focus Your Research Area

Before you start trying to identify gaps in the literature, you need to figure out what your area of interest is, and then focus and narrow that research area. If you don't narrow down your initial research area of interest, you'll end up wanting to research everything. You'll overwhelm yourself with all the research gaps you find because there are still a lot of unanswered research questions out there. 

• Do some exploratory research  on your broad research idea in your course textbook, class notes, in meta-analysis, systematic, and literature reviews, and  PsycINFO  to identify more specific issues and arguments in your research area and possible relationships between them.
• Read ebooks  to get the "big picture" about the research area you're interested in studying. Books and ebooks provide detailed information on your research area, put your research area in context, provide summaries of research, and help you identify major themes and relationships for your study.
• Ask your advisors and other faculty  about possible topics or issues within your research area of interest. That being said, you're going to spend over a year immersed in work on your thesis, so make sure you  choose issues because you find them deeply interesting , not just because your advisor recommended them.

Step 2: Read, Read, and then Read Some More

Read (a lot of) research articles : this is going to be time-demanding, but you really do need to read through a lot of research articles in your research area to become an expert in it. That being said, what you use from the articles that you read should relate directly back to your focused research questions and hypothesis. Don't waste your time getting sidetracked by issues that don't relate to your research questions and hypothesis.

• Go to  Start Finding Sources ,  Search Databases , and  Browse Journals  to find journal articles for your research area
• Pay close attention to Introductions , in which authors explain why their research is important, and Suggestions for Future Research , in which authors point readers to areas which lack investigation or need future examination

Follow the research trails  of seminal articles and authors using Web of Science and Scopus:

• In Scopus , click on Document Search , enter the article title, click on the article title in the list of search hits, then click on View all ~ citing documents link in the right sidebar for a list of articles that have cited this article
• In Web of Science , enter the article title and choose Title from the right drop down menu , then click on the Times Cited number next to the article to see a list of articles that have cited this article
• In Scopus , click on Author Search , enter the last name and first initial(s) of the author, click on the author's name in the list of search hits, then click on Cited By ~ documents for a list of articles that have cited this author
• In Web of Science , enter the author name and choose Author from the right drop down menu , then click on the Times Cited number next to each article to see a list of articles that have cited this author's article

Read meta-analyses, literature reviews,  and  systematic reviews : these papers delve deep into the literature, examining the trends and changes over a long period of time in your research area and summaries of previous research findings.

• In PsycINFO , click on literature review, systematic review, and  meta analysis  under the Methodologies heading in the sidebar to the right of the list of search hits 
• In CINAHL , add systematic reviews to your search 
• In Web Of Science , check the box beside Review under the Document Type heading in the sidebar to the right of the list of search hits

Step 3: Map out the Literature :

Keep track of what the authors told you and the questions that occur to you whenever you read anything - an article, a book, a book chapter, a dissertation, etc. This will also help you write your thesis introduction later on and help you avoid  unconscious plagiarism .Some more tips:

• Use mind maps, tables, charts, pictures, post-it notes to map out the literature, whatever works for you. 
• Research each of your questions to see if there are people out there who had the same questions and found answers to them
• Science Direct , Web of Science , and Wiley Online Library databases help you follow the research trail by listing articles that have since cited the research article you're reading

If you find don't find any answers to one of your questions, you've probably found a research gap from which you can develop a thesis hypothesis and experimental project. Get feedback from your advisors before you get too carried away, though!

• Get started by considering your central thesis question 
• How do the sources you've found connect to that question and help you answer it?
• How do the sources connect to and build off of one another?
• << Previous: What Do Thesis Projects Involve?
• Next: Develop A Hypothesis >>
• Last Updated: Sep 17, 2024 11:27 AM
• URL: https://guides.umd.umich.edu/psychology

Call us at 313-593-5559

Chat with us

Text us: 313-486-5399

Email us your question

• 4901 Evergreen Road Dearborn, MI 48128, USA
• Phone: 313-593-5000
• Maps & Directions
• M+Google Mail
• Emergency Information
• UM-Dearborn Connect
• Wolverine Access

Identifying Research Gaps to Pursue Innovative Research

This article is an excerpt from a lecture given by my Ph.D. guide, a researcher in public health. She advised us on how to identify research gaps to pursue innovative research in our fields.

What is a Research Gap?

Today we are talking about the research gap: what is it, how to identify it, and how to make use of it so that you can pursue innovative research. Now, how many of you have ever felt you had discovered a new and exciting research question , only to find that it had already been written about? I have experienced this more times than I can count. Graduate studies come with pressure to add new knowledge to the field. We can contribute to the progress and knowledge of humanity. To do this, we need to first learn to identify research gaps in the existing literature.

A research gap is, simply, a topic or area for which missing or insufficient information limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question. It should not be confused with a research question, however. For example, if we ask the research question of what the healthiest diet for humans is, we would find many studies and possible answers to this question. On the other hand, if we were to ask the research question of what are the effects of antidepressants on pregnant women, we would not find much-existing data. This is a research gap. When we identify a research gap, we identify a direction for potentially new and exciting research.

How to Identify Research Gap?

Considering the volume of existing research, identifying research gaps can seem overwhelming or even impossible. I don’t have time to read every paper published on public health. Similarly, you guys don’t have time to read every paper. So how can you identify a research gap?

There are different techniques in various disciplines, but we can reduce most of them down to a few steps, which are:

• Identify your key motivating issue/question
• Identify key terms associated with this issue
• Review the literature, searching for these key terms and identifying relevant publications
• Review the literature cited by the key publications which you located in the above step
• Identify issues not addressed by  the literature relating to your critical  motivating issue

It is the last step which we all find the most challenging. It can be difficult to figure out what an article is  not  saying. I like to keep a list of notes of biased or inconsistent information. You could also track what authors write as “directions for future research,” which often can point us towards the existing gaps.

Different Types of Research Gaps

Identifying research gaps is an essential step in conducting research, as it helps researchers to refine their research questions and to focus their research efforts on areas where there is a need for more knowledge or understanding.

1. Knowledge gaps

These are gaps in knowledge or understanding of a subject, where more research is needed to fill the gaps. For example, there may be a lack of understanding of the mechanisms behind a particular disease or how a specific technology works.

2. Conceptual gaps

These are gaps in the conceptual framework or theoretical understanding of a subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to understand the relationship between two concepts or to refine a theoretical framework.

3. Methodological gaps

These are gaps in the methods used to study a particular subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to develop new research methods or to refine existing methods to address specific research questions.

4. Data gaps

These are gaps in the data available on a particular subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to collect data on a specific population or to develop new measures to collect data on a particular construct.

5. Practical gaps

These are gaps in the application of research findings to practical situations. For example, there may be a need for more research to understand how to implement evidence-based practices in real-world settings or to identify barriers to implementing such practices.

Examples of Research Gap

Limited understanding of the underlying mechanisms of a disease:.

Despite significant research on a particular disease, there may be a lack of understanding of the underlying mechanisms of the disease. For example, although much research has been done on Alzheimer’s disease, the exact mechanisms that lead to the disease are not yet fully understood.

Inconsistencies in the findings of previous research:

When previous research on a particular topic has inconsistent findings, there may be a need for further research to clarify or resolve these inconsistencies. For example, previous research on the effectiveness of a particular treatment for a medical condition may have produced inconsistent findings, indicating a need for further research to determine the true effectiveness of the treatment.

Limited research on emerging technologies:

As new technologies emerge, there may be limited research on their applications, benefits, and potential drawbacks. For example, with the increasing use of artificial intelligence in various industries, there is a need for further research on the ethical, legal, and social implications of AI.

How to Deal with Literature Gap?

Once you have identified the literature gaps, it is critical to prioritize. You may find many questions which remain to be answered in the literature. Often one question must be answered before the next can be addressed. In prioritizing the gaps, you have identified, you should consider your funding agency or stakeholders, the needs of the field, and the relevance of your questions to what is currently being studied. Also, consider your own resources and ability to conduct the research you’re considering. Once you have done this, you can narrow your search down to an appropriate question.

Tools to Help Your Search

There are thousands of new articles published every day, and staying up to date on the literature can be overwhelming. You should take advantage of the technology that is available. Some services include  PubCrawler ,  Feedly ,  Google Scholar , and PubMed updates. Stay up to date on social media forums where scholars share new discoveries, such as Twitter. Reference managers such as  Mendeley  can help you keep your references well-organized. I personally have had success using Google Scholar and PubMed to stay current on new developments and track which gaps remain in my personal areas of interest.

The most important thing I want to impress upon you today is that you will struggle to  choose a research topic  that is innovative and exciting if you don’t know the existing literature well. This is why identifying research gaps starts with an extensive and thorough  literature review . But give yourself some boundaries.  You don’t need to read every paper that has ever been written on a topic. You may find yourself thinking you’re on the right track and then suddenly coming across a paper that you had intended to write! It happens to everyone- it happens to me quite often. Don’t give up- keep reading and you’ll find what you’re looking for.

Class dismissed!

How do you identify research gaps? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Frequently Asked Questions

A research gap can be identified by looking for a topic or area with missing or insufficient information that limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question.

Identifying a research gap is important as it provides a direction for potentially new research or helps bridge the gap in existing literature.

Gap in research is a topic or area with missing or insufficient information. A research gap limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question.

Thank u for your suggestion.

Very useful tips specially for a beginner

Thank you. This is helpful. I find that I’m overwhelmed with literatures. As I read on a particular topic, and in a particular direction I find that other conflicting issues, topic a and ideas keep popping up, making me more confused.

I am very grateful for your advice. It’s just on point.

The clearest, exhaustive, and brief explanation I have ever read.

Thanks for sharing

Thank you very much.The work is brief and understandable

Thank you it is very informative

Thanks for sharing this educative article

Thank you for such informative explanation.

Great job smart guy! Really outdid yourself!

Nice one! I thank you for this as it is just what I was looking for!😃🤟

Thank you so much for this. Much appreciated

Thank you so much.

Thankyou for ur briefing…its so helpful

Thank you so much .I’ved learn a lot from this.❤️

Very exciting and useful piece for researchers.

Your are awesome, it’s a great article.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

• AI in Academia

Disclosing the Use of Generative AI: Best practices for authors in manuscript preparation

The rapid proliferation of generative and other AI-based tools in research writing has ignited an…

Avoiding the AI Trap: Pitfalls of relying on ChatGPT for PhD applications

10 Ways to Help Students Restore Focus on Learning

Switching Your Major As a Researcher: Things to Consider Before Making the Decision

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

• Industry News
• Publishing Research
• Promoting Research
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer Review Week 2024
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

Which among these features would you prefer the most in a peer review assistant?

Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation: What Enablers Do We Need and When Do We Need Them to Ensure Success?

• First Online: 13 September 2024

Cite this chapter

• Catherine Comiskey 3  

Part of the book series: Advances in Mental Health and Addiction ((AMHA))

The gap between what is known from research, to applying that research in real-life situations is referred to as, the implementation gap. Implementation science has developed as a discipline to address this gap. It seeks to understand and map the processes to take what is known from scientific evidence and to bring this evidence to inform and improve policy and practice. As essential aspect of sustaining successful implementation is an adequate monitoring and evaluation system. Furthermore, a failure to monitor and evaluate is a failure to provide good governance. This chapter explores the application and practical use of a range of common implementation science frameworks. It provides details on the enablers and barriers during the various stages of implementation and on cycles of improvement. The chapter explains the steps for a successful evaluation and how data can be generated for this. This includes indicator data from a monitoring system. The chapter concludes with two practical case studies, one describing a program to increase PhD education within healthcare and one to increase clinical research outputs with an example from an HIV/AIDS clinic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Banka Cullen, S., Lavelle, S., McDonagh, D., Walsh, R., & Comiskey, C. (2022). In plain sight: A rapid review of the international Litera-ture and a National Estimate of the prevalence of women who use substances and experience domestic violence in Ireland . S. Project. https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/36282/1/DAVINA%20Report%20Final%20Revised%20May%202022.pdf

Burke, K., Morris, K., & McGarrigle, L. (2012). An introductory guide to implementation: Terms, concepts and frameworks . Centre for Effective Services.

Google Scholar  

CDC. (1999). Framework for program evaluation in public health. MMWR 1999;48 (No.RR-11):1–42 . Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved April 16, 2024 from https://www.cdc.gov/evaluation/materials/frameworksummary.pdf

CDC. (2021). Evaluation steps . Retrieved April 16, 2024 from https://www.cdc.gov/evaluation/steps/index.htm

Comiskey, C. M., O’Sullivan, K., Quirke, M. B., Wynne, C., Hollywood, E., & McGilloway, S. (2015). An analysis of the first implementation and impact of the World Health Organisation’s health promoting school model within disadvantaged city schools in Ireland. Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies, 10 (4), 281–293.

Comiskey, C. et al. (2018) An evaluation of the gay Men’s health service outreach Programme, HSE Sexual Health & Crisis Pregnancy Programme . ISBN 978-1-905199-44-0 . Available at: https://www.sexualwellbeing.ie/for-professionals/research/research-reports/gmhs-report_final.pdf . Accessed 03 June 2024.

Damschroder, L. J., Aron, D. C., Keith, R. E., Kirsh, S. R., Alexander, J. A., & Lowery, J. C. (2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4 , 1–15.

Article   Google Scholar  

Department of Health. (2018). NCEC implementation guide and toolkit . https://health.gov.ie/national-patient-safety-office/ncec/

Eccles, M. P., & Mittman, B. S. (2006). Welcome to implementation science. Implementation Science, 1 (1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-1-1

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

EMCDDA. (2021). Action framework for developing and implementing health and social responses to drug problems . European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. Retrieved August 28, 2023 from https://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/mini-guides/action-framework-for-developing-and-implementing-health-and-social-responses-to-drug-problems_en#section2

Farrell, G., & Comiskey, C. (2014). Dualities of living with HIV/HCV co-infection: Patients’ perspectives from those who are ineligible for or nonresponsive to treatment. Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, 25 (1), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jana.2012.10.005

Fixsen, D. L. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature . National Implementation Research Network.

Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., & Boles, S. M. (1999). Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health, 89 (9), 1322–1327.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Gossop, M., Marsden, J., Stewart, D., & Rolfe, A. (2000). Patterns of improvement after methadone treatment: 1 year follow-up results from the National Treatment Outcome Research Study (NTORS). Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 60 (3), 275–286.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

IEG. (2024). What is monitoring and evaluation? . Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) of the World Bank Retrieved April 11, 2024 from https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/what-monitoring-and-evaluation

Jobs, S. (1985, February 1). Excerpt from an interview with David Sheff , www.scribd.com . https://allaboutstevejobs.com/verbatim/interviews/playboy_1985

Kusek, J. Z., & Rist, R. C. (2004). Ten steps to a results-based monitoring and evaluation system: a handbook for development practitioners . World Bank Publications.

Book   Google Scholar  

McGilloway, S., Bywater, T., Ni Mhaille, G., Furlong, M., O’Neill, D., Comiskey, C., Leckey, Y., Kelly, P., & Donnelly, M. , (2009). Proving the power of positive parenting: A randomised controlled trial to investigate the effectiveness of the incredible years BASIC parenting training programme in an Irish context (short-term outcomes) . I. Dublin, Archways. https://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Incredible-Years-Ireland-Study-Proving-the-Power-of-Positive-Parenting-Report.pdf

McKee, G., Codd, M., Dempsey, O., Gallagher, P., & Comiskey, C. (2017). Describing the implementation of an innovative intervention and evaluating its effectiveness in increasing research capacity of advanced clinical nurses: Using the consolidated framework for implementation research. BMC Nursing, 16 , 1–13.

Metz, A., & Louison, L. (2019). The hexagon: An exploration tool. Hexagon discussion & analysis tool instructions. National Implementation Research Network , Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Based on Kiser, Zabel, Zachik, & Smith (2007) and Blase, Kiser & Van Dyke (2013) . https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/sites/nirn.fpg.unc.edu/files/imce/documents/NIRN%20Hexagon%20Discussion%20Analysis%20Tool%20v2.2.pdf

Metz, A., Naoom, S. F., Halle, T., & Bartley, L. (2015). An integrated stage-based framework for implementation of early childhood programs and systems (OPRE Research Brief OPRE 2015–48). Office of Planning. Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved April 10, 2024, from https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/sites/nirn.fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/OPRE-stage_based_framework_brief_508.pdf

Moullin, J. C., Sabater-Hernández, D., Fernandez-Llimos, F., & Benrimoj, S. I. (2015). A systematic review of implementation frameworks of innovations in healthcare and resulting generic implementation framework. Health Research Policy and Systems, 13 , 1–11.

Nickitas, D. M., & Feeg, V. (2011). Doubling the number of nurses with a doctorate by 2020: Predicting the right number or getting it right? Nursing Economics, 29 (3), 109–112.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

NIH. (2023). Toolkit part 1: Implementation science methodologies and frameworks. Fogarty International Centre, National Institute of Health. Retrieved April 11, 2024 from https://www.fic.nih.gov/About/center-global-health-studies/neuroscience-implementation-toolkit/Pages/methodologies-frameworks.aspx

Nilsen, P. (2020). Making sense of implementation theories, models, and frameworks. Implementation Science, 3 ( 0 ), 53–79.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2023). Our global reach. Retrieved April 15, 2024 from https://www.oecd.org/about/members-and-partners/

RE-AIM. (2024). RE-AIM . Retrieved April 11, 2024 from https://re-aim.org/

Sheehan, A. M., While, A. E., & Coyne, I. (2015). The experiences and impact of transition from child to adult healthcare services for young people with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetic Medicine, 32 (4), 440–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.12639

Simpson, D. D., Patrick, F. M., Joe, G., & Lehman, W. (2009). Organizational readiness for change . Texas Christian University. Institute of Behavioral Research. Retrieved April 11, 2024 from https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/17872/

Smit, B., Williamson, C., & Padayachee, A. (2013). PhD capacity-building, from aid to innovation: The SANPAD-SANTRUST experience. Studies in Higher Education, 38 (3), 441–455.

Wade, M. J. (2016). From Ockham’s razor to rube Goldberg: Don’t rely on forensic age-dating miracles. Environmental Forensics, 17 (2), 131–135.

Wang, Y., Wong, E. L.-Y., Nilsen, P., Chung, V. C.-H., Tian, Y., & Yeoh, E.-K. (2023). A scoping review of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks—An appraisal of purpose, characteristics, usability, applicability, and testability. Implementation Science, 18 (1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01296-x

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Trinity College Dublin, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

Catherine Comiskey

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine Comiskey .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Comiskey, C. (2024). Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation: What Enablers Do We Need and When Do We Need Them to Ensure Success?. In: Addiction Research and Evaluation. Advances in Mental Health and Addiction. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65917-1_10

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65917-1_10

Published : 13 September 2024

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-65916-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-65917-1

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research