IDD
Dissertation
Handbook
2020/21
Campus Version
David Cobley
Contents
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3
Aims of the handbook .............................................................................................................. 3
Learning Outcomes ................................................................................................................. 3
Handbook Structure ................................................................................................................ 3
Part 1: Preparing a Research Proposal .................................................................................. 4
1.1 What is ‘Social Science Research’ .................................................................................... 4
1.2 What is a Dissertation? ...................................................................................................... 4
1.3 Identifying a Research Topic ............................................................................................. 6
1.4 Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 8
1.4.1 Descriptive Research Questions ................................................................................................... 8
1.4.2 Explanatory Research Questions ................................................................................................... 9
1.4.3 Refining the Research Questions ................................................................................................. 10
1.4.4 Examples of Research Topics and Questions ........................................................................... 10
1.4.5 Reflection Activity ........................................................................................................................... 11
1.5 The Role of a Conceptual Framework ........................................................................... 12
1.6 How to Structure a Dissertation Research Proposal ................................................... 12
1.7 Research Strategy: Deduction or Induction .................................................................. 14
Deduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 14
Induction ........................................................................................................................................................ 14
1.8 Research Philosophy ........................................................................................................ 16
1.8.1 Positivism ........................................................................................................................................... 16
1.8.2 Interpretive Social Science ............................................................................................................ 17
1.8.3 Critical Social Science ................................................................................................................... 17
1.8.4 Putting the three approaches into practice ............................................................................... 18
1.9 Research Design ............................................................................................................... 19
1.9.1 Experimental Design ...................................................................................................................... 20
1.9.2 Case Study Design ......................................................................................................................... 20
1.9.3 Comparative Design ...................................................................................................................... 24
1.9.4 Longitudinal Design........................................................................................................................ 24
1.9.5 Combining Design Strategies....................................................................................................... 24
1.10 Pause for thought ........................................................................................................... 25
Part 2: Doing the Literature Review .................................................................................... 26
2.1 What is a Literature Review? ......................................................................................... 26
2.2 Which Literature is Relevant? ....................................................................................... 27
2.2.1 Published Empirical/Primary Research Studies ......................................................................... 28
2.2.2 Published Non-empirical Literature ............................................................................................ 28
2.2.3 Grey Literature ............................................................................................................................... 28
2.2.4 Hierarchy of Evidence ................................................................................................................... 30
2.3 Searching for Literature ................................................................................................. 30
2.3.1 Books and Journal Articles........................................................................................................... 30
2.3.2 Electronic Databases ..................................................................................................................... 31
2.3.3 Internet Searching .......................................................................................................................... 31
2.3.4 Snowball Searching......................................................................................................................... 32
2.3.5 Searching for Grey Literature ..................................................................................................... 33
2.3.6 How much time should I devote to literature searching? .................................................... 33
2.4 Selecting Literature for Inclusion .................................................................................. 34
Dissertation Handbook: Contents
2.6 Critically Reviewing the Literature ............................................................................... 36
2.7 Synthesising the Literature ............................................................................................ 37
2.8 Writing up the Literature Review ................................................................................. 38
2.9 Avoiding Plagiarism ........................................................................................................ 39
2.10 Using References and Quotations ................................................................................ 39
Part 3: Methodological Approaches ..................................................................................... 41
3.1 Desk-based Dissertations ............................................................................................... 41
3.1.1 Case Study Approach .................................................................................................................... 42
3.1.2 Systematic Review.......................................................................................................................... 43
3.1.3 Archival Research........................................................................................................................... 43
3.1.4 Social Media Research ................................................................................................................... 45
3.1.5 Discourse Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 49
3.2 Sampling Methods ........................................................................................................... 50
3.2.1 Random Sampling ........................................................................................................................... 50
3.2.2 Purposive Sampling ........................................................................................................................ 51
3.3 Quantitative Research Methods .................................................................................... 52
3.3.1 Collecting Quantitative Data ....................................................................................................... 53
3.3.2 Analysing Quantitative Data ........................................................................................................ 55
3.4 Qualitative Research Methods ....................................................................................... 55
3.4.1 Collecting Qualitative Data.......................................................................................................... 56
3.4.2 Analysing Qualitative Data ........................................................................................................... 63
3.5 Mixed Methods ................................................................................................................ 64
3.6 Ethical Issues.................................................................................................................... 65
Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and Marking ................................................ 68
4.1 Writing up the Dissertation ........................................................................................... 68
4.1.1 The Preliminaries ........................................................................................................................... 68
4.1.2 The Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 69
4.1.3 The Literature Review .................................................................................................................. 69
4.1.4 The Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 69
4.1.5 The Study Findings ......................................................................................................................... 69
4.1.6 The Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 71
4.1.7 The References ............................................................................................................................... 72
4.1.8 The Appendices .............................................................................................................................. 72
4.2 Formatting and Submitting your Dissertation. ............................................................. 72
4.3 Marking Procedure .......................................................................................................... 76
Part 5: Fieldwork Expenses and Travel Arrangements ...................................................... 77
5.1 Fieldwork Expenses.......................................................................................................... 77
5.1.1 Airfares............................................................................................................................................... 77
5.1.2 Expenses ............................................................................................................................................ 77
5.1.3 Reimbursement ................................................................................................................................ 78
5.2 Travel Arrangements ...................................................................................................... 77
5.2.1 Risk Assessment............................................................................................................................... 77
5.2.2 Travel Insurance............................................................................................................................... 78
5.2.3 Safe to Travel.................................................................................................................................... 78
5.2.4 Fieldwork Preparation Form......................................................................................................... 78
5.2.5 Tier 4 Students: Authorised Absence......................................................................................... 78
5.3 Example: Statement of Expenditure .............................................................................. 80
References ............................................................................................................................... 81
Dissertation Handbook: Contents
Introduction
Aims of the handbook
This handbook aims to support you through the process of undertaking a Master’s dissertation,
within the field of international development, from choosing your topic to final submission. The
range of topics covered by the handbook was governed by the need to provide a broad coverage of
the various research issues that you may encounter when planning and writing your dissertation.
Learning Outcomes
This handbook aims to support you to:

prepare a dissertation proposal that meets the requirements of IDD;

consider various research design options for your dissertation;

understand various philosophies of social science research;

learn how to undertake a literature review within your chosen topic;

understand various research methods which may be used in your dissertation;

understand how to choose appropriate methods to meet particular research objectives;

develop an awareness of ethical considerations relevant to the dissertation;

learn how to structure and write up a dissertation;

understand the practicalities of submitting your dissertation.
Handbook Structure
You will find the accompanying readings for the Handbook within the dissertation module on
Canvas. The handbook is divided into three parts:
Part One: Preparing a Research Proposal
The first part provides guidance on choosing a research topic, identifying researchable
questions and writing the dissertation proposal. It also examines three major research
philosophies and considers various research strategy and design options.
Part Two: Doing a Literature Review
The second part focuses on the literature review, including how to search for literature,
how to critically analyse literature, and how to structure and write up the literature review.
Part Three: Methodological Approaches
The third part introduces basic sampling procedures, and then goes on to examine various
methods of collecting and analysing both quantitative and qualitative data. This section will
also provide guidance on ethical considerations.
Part Four: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and Marking
This part provides guidance on writing up the dissertation, briefly summarising the
requirements of each section from the preliminaries to the appendices. The submissions and
marking procedures are also explained.
Part Five: Fieldwork Expenses and Travel Arrangements
The final part provides a guide to claiming fieldwork expenses and making travel
arrangements, applicably to MSc students only.
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing a research proposal
3
Part 1: Preparing a Research Proposal
Part One first considers the meaning of social science and then takes you through the various steps
involved in planning a dissertation, from choosing a research topic to presenting the dissertation
proposal. It then goes on to explore some of the most common research strategies and designs.
1.1 What is ‘Social Science Research’
‘Social science research’ can be understood as the scientific process by which theories about human
behaviour are developed and tested, using empirical data. The aim of this process is to create
knowledge and understanding, by developing or validating theories which explain, or predict, some
social phenomenon or occurrence. The knowledge and understanding created may then be used in
various ways, such as providing a basis for new policies or development interventions, or helping us
to better understand the impact of policies and interventions.
While approaches to social science research vary considerably, there are certain fundamentals that
should always apply (Fraser et al., 2014):

Systematic: The conduct and presentation of research should be systematic and logical.
There should be a systematic and logical link between observation and explanation.

Sceptical: Scientific research should question conventional wisdom, seeking evidence to
justify alternative propositions and arguments.

Ethical: Social science research should be conducted in a manner that protects those that
are involved in the research (especially research participants) from any harm arising from
their involvement in the study. Ethical issues revolve around consent, deception, harm,
privacy and confidentiality of data.
Difficult judgements and decisions are required throughout the research process, and the willingness
of researchers to reflect on, and even critique, their own research approaches and methods is of the
considered to be one hallmarks of a good social science researcher (Somekh & Lewin, 2005).
1.2 What is a Dissertation?
The dissertation is a focused research study, providing an opportunity for you to apply the theory
and knowledge that you have acquired, through the modules completed, to a particular development
topic of interest to yourself. The topic may relate to your own work and/or country, although this is
not essential. Most important is that the topic is practicable, in the sense that there are adequate
sources of reliable information available, and that the study can be supervised by an IDD staff
member.
There are two basic types of dissertation to choose from:
A Desk-based Study
For this type of study you would choose a particular topic, identify research questions, and
then systematically search the literature for ‘raw’ data. This data will usually include
theoretical models and concepts as well as empirical research findings. Your search will
probably start with books and academic journals but may also include ‘grey’ literature, such
as unpublished reports, newspaper articles and statistical surveys. You may even collect your
own primary data, through methods such as online surveys, e-mail questionnaires or Skype
interviews. The task is to synthesise and analyse this data in order to draw conclusions
which relate to the research questions and add something new to what is already known
about the topic.
A Field Research Study
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
4
The approach will be similar to that adopted for a desk-based study, and the literature will
still provide the main basis for your study. However, you will collect some of the ‘raw’ data
yourself through a period of field research, in order to supplement the evidence obtained
through your literature search.
There are various ways of constructing a dissertation, whichever approach is selected. However, the
following basic criteria should always be met:

A dissertation should be an independent and self-directed piece of academic work.

It should place the topic within its academic context, through a systematic literature review.

It should address one or more specific research questions.

It should seek to develop ideas/theories in order to enhance understanding of the issues
involved, and to address the research question, or questions.

It should demonstrate that a clear and logical strategy (or methodology) has been followed,
in order to answer the research question or questions.
A dissertation is not simply an extended essay. The main differences between an essay and a
dissertation are summarised below:
Box 1.1 - Essays and Dissertations
Essay Characteristics
 The essay title is usually set by someone else.
 The focus of the topic can be broad.
 The essay will summarise current knowledge and information on a topic.
 The way in which knowledge is accessed is not necessarily made explicit.
Dissertation Characteristics
 The dissertation title is chosen by the student.
 The focus of the topic will be well-defined.
 The dissertation will summarise current knowledge, prior to addressing the
research question.
 The way in which knowledge is accessed (methodology) is always made explicit.
 Synthesis of information occurs, to offer a new perspective on the topic, and to
answer the research question.
Source: Adapted from Aveyard, H., 2007, p. 20
Perhaps the most important difference is that you choose the dissertation title, giving you the
opportunity to study something that really interests you in some depth. Another crucial difference is
that a dissertation has a focused research question, or set of questions, which should be addressed
logically and methodically. The research questions give direction to the dissertation, keeping it
focused, and showing its boundaries. They also point to the literature that will be needed and
provide a framework for writing up the dissertation.
A typical basic structure required for a dissertation is shown below:
Box 1.2 - Typical Dissertation Structure
1. An introduction, presenting the research area and topic, explaining the purpose of the
study and presenting the research questions. You should also briefly outline the
methodological approach and overall structure of the dissertation.
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
5
2. A literature review, which provides a foundation for the study, explores relevant
concepts and shows how the research questions relate to the wider literature.
3. A detailed methodology chapter, describing the underpinning research philosophy, how
the research has been designed, how sampling will be carried out, if needed, and how
data will be collected and analysed. The chapter should also cover ethical considerations
and methodological limitations to the study. It is good practice to personally reflect on
the methodological choices that you have made throughout the process, and these
reflections can be summarised and incorporated into your methodology chapter at the
writing up stage.
4. Findings and analysis: A presentation and analysis of your study findings. This section
should link back to the research questions and literature review. You may also discuss
the implications of your findings here, which will link forward to the conclusions.
5. Conclusion: This will summarise the main findings, as well as drawing conclusions from
these findings which link back to the research questions and literature review.
Conclusions may include, for example, implications for policy, organisational change or
future service delivery. You should also refer to any limitations of your research findings
and suggest areas for further research.
There may well be variations on this basic structure. For example, some dissertations may have
additional chapters which provide background and context in relation to a particular case study (or
case studies) which form part of the study.
Box 1.3 - Reflection Activity: Desk-based Study or Field Study?
Think about whether you would prefer to do a desk-based study or a field study.
Remember that you will not get extra marks simply because you have chosen to do
fieldwork! You should only choose this option if you really feel that you can add value to
your study by collecting your own primary data, and if you have the necessary time and
resources to do so.
1.3 Identifying a Research Topic
One of the first tasks to consider, when planning a dissertation, is how to go about choosing a
research topic. Ideally, the topic should relate to your programme’s learning outcomes, as well as to
your own interests and/or experience. It may arise from a desire to improve the state of knowledge
in a particular field. It may focus on a particular policy or issue affecting society in some way, perhaps
based on something in the media. It may relate to your own work or career, perhaps focusing on an
issue that has arisen at work, either within an organisation that you work for or during a particular
project that you were involved with.
The usual way to start choosing a research topic is to do some general reading around possible
topics that interest you, in order to develop your thoughts as to which may be the most interesting
and practicable to study. This process should help you to identify literature debates to which you
may be able to make a contribution, or knowledge gaps that you may help to fill. It may be helpful to
examine the concluding chapters of past dissertation or other research papers, as they often suggest
areas for further research. Discuss your ideas with friends and colleagues, particularly those with
some academic experience, as this may help you to clarify your own thinking.
Once you have a general idea for a research topic, you may be able to develop this idea, and
generate new ideas, through a simple technique known as mind mapping. Write down your main
topic in the centre of a piece of paper, and then link this general topic to associated sub-topics. The
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
6
sub-topics will usually be more focused, and hence more manageable as a dissertation topic. Here is
one that I used when choosing a topic for my Masters dissertation:
Figure 1.1: Example of a Mind Map
The general topic ‘employment of disabled people’ is probably too broad for a Masters dissertation.
However, the mind map helps with the process of identifying associated topics and showing how
they link to the main one. Through this process, it becomes possible to identify several potential
dissertation topics that are focused and manageable. I chose to focus on the sub-topic ‘barriers to
employment’ (circled in green), within the geographical context of Uganda, which was a country that
I had a particular interest in.
It is useful to document the steps that you have taken to identify a research topic, as you can draw
on this when writing about the rationale for choosing your particular topic.
Box 1.4 - Reflection Activity: Choosing a Dissertation Topic
Write down the various factors that could influence your choice of dissertation topic.
These could include, for example, your future career choice, a particular interest that
you have, or a ‘hot’ topic in the media.
Bearing in mind these factors, write down 2 or 3 broad topics that could be a possible
choice for your dissertation.
For each of these broad topics, construct a mind map, as in Figure 1.1 above. Then try to
circle areas within each mind map that could be suitable for a focused dissertation topic.
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
7
1.4 Research Questions
Having identified a research topic, the next step is to select one or more research questions. These
help to give the project a clear and coherent direction, to keep it focused and to provide a
framework for writing up the results of the research. In order to achieve this, research questions
should be clear, specific and non-ambiguous. It must be possible to answer them with the data that
can be gathered, and within the timeframe available. It is vitally important to be realistic in making this
judgement. As the dissertation progresses, it is useful to re-focus on the research questions from
time to time, in order to ensure that the project is not being side-tracked into areas that are not
very relevant. Otherwise the project can easily become over-complicated and difficult to complete.
For a Masters dissertation, it is likely that one, two or at most three focused research questions will
be quite sufficient (some students choose to have one main research question and additional subquestions). Where there is more than one main research question, the questions should relate to
each other in some meaningful way. It is important to distinguish between research questions and
data collection questions (such as interview questions). Research questions are designed to direct
the entire research project, while data collection questions may simply be designed to elicit
information from respondents that may contribute towards gaining the background and knowledge
needed to address the research questions.
There are three main types of research questions that social researchers may ask:
What is happening?
This type of question is normally associated with descriptive research.
Why is it happening?
This type of question is normally associated with explanatory research.
How can it be changed?
This type of question is asking how a phenomenon can be influenced or changed in some way. It may
be seeking to identify a new development strategy or intervention, for example, or some way of
improving an existing one.
Please note that it will not normally be sufficient to produce a piece of research that is
‘descriptive only’ for your dissertation. However, descriptive research may be a forerunner to
a piece of explanatory research, provoking the ‘why’ question. For example, if a piece of descriptive
research identifies a certain type of poverty within a particular social group, this may lead to the
question ‘why is this the case?’ Before addressing this ‘why’ question, it is essential to know that the
phenomenon exists in the first place.
1.4.1 Descriptive Research Questions
Descriptive research seeks to “portray an accurate profile of persons, events or situations” (Robson,
1993, p 4), thus helping us to understand persons, events and situations more fully, and is particularly
useful when dealing with phenomena that are under-investigated or relatively new. Good descriptive
research can play a key role in social interventions and policy reforms, by identifying and examining
social problems.
De Vaus (2001, p 17) suggests six important considerations to take into account when developing
descriptive research questions. These are shown below, using the ‘Barriers to employment of
disabled people in Uganda’ example to illustrate each consideration:
What is the scope of the core concepts?
What do we mean by disability? What types of employment are we considering? (formal as well as
informal?; self-employment?)
What timeframe are we going to use?
Are we interested in the historical situation, or are we concerned only with the barriers that exist
today?
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
8
What is the geographical location for the description?
Will the study cover the whole of Uganda, using representative samples? Will it focus on urban areas
only, or just one particular region?
How general is the description to be?
Do we want to focus on specific subgroups (for example, people with mobility impairments only, or
certain age groups?)
What aspect of the topic are we interested in?
What types of barriers are we interested in identifying - physical? attitudinal? legislative? From whose
perspective should the barriers be identified - disabled people in employment? disabled people
seeking employment? employers? relatives?)
What is the unit of analysis?
Will the research focus on individual disabled people, or perhaps on a livelihoods project designed
to promote employment among disabled people?
1.4.2 Explanatory Research Questions
Explanatory research is generally aimed at answering the ‘why’ questions. When we know more
about specific events and phenomena then we can begin to theorise and seek explanations. For
example, having studied divorce rate patterns in a particular country, perhaps establishing trends
over time and making comparisons with other countries, we may want to know why divorce rates
are as they are, and what causes them to rise or fall. Explanatory questions seek to answer these
kinds of questions. We can look for a single explanation or a range of explanations as to why a
particular phenomenon occurs. Some will be simplistic whilst others will be more complex. It is
important to be clear and specific about which causes or consequences we aim to investigate. De
Vaus (2001) outlines three types of explanatory research:

Searching for causes or effects
This involves searching for either causes or effects of a core phenomenon (such as the
changes in the divorce rate over a certain period). The causes or effects are known as
independent variables, while the core phenomenon is known as the dependent variable.

Exploring a simple causal proposition
This involves specifying a particular causal proposition to examine. For example, we might
examine the proposition that ‘the rise of the women’s movement has led to an increase in
the UK divorce rate over the past fifty years’.

More complex causal models
These focus on the mechanisms by which two or more factors may be related in the causal
chain. These mechanisms are sometimes known as intervening variables. For example, one
intervening variable for the simple causal proposition stated above may be the increased
economic independence of women, due to their greater participation in the workforce.
It is useful to ask four key questions:

What am I trying to explain (what is the core phenomenon, or dependent variable?)

What are the possible causes or effects (what are the independent variables?)

Which causes or effects will I explore?

Which possible mechanisms (or intervening variables) may connect the presumed causes or
effects with the core phenomenon?
One word of caution: be careful in making claims around causality unless you are confident that
the methods that you have used are statistically valid. It is often much safer to talk about possible or
likely reasons for certain phenomena, or for associations between variables, than to claim causality.
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
9
1.4.3 Refining the Research Questions
Your research questions may well need to be refined, or even changed completely, as the
dissertation progresses. This is a natural and common occurrence, which may occur for any of the
following reasons:

Not enough literature
If there is not enough literature that is directly relevant to your research question, it will be
hard to carry out a good literature review, particularly if there are very few empirical
research studies to draw on. This can lead to a frustrating search for elusive literature.

Too much literature
There is so much relevant literature that it becomes difficult to decide what to use and what
to leave out. This can be overwhelming, and make it hard to carry out a good quality critical
appraisal or synthesis. It will also be hard to add new insights.

The question is too broad
As the project develops, it may become obvious that the question is too broad, or not
specific enough, to answer with the resources that you have available.

The question has already been comprehensively dealt with
This may become apparent as you conduct your literature review

Alternative questions emerge as more relevant
This may become apparent as you identify gaps in the literature, or even as you go about
collecting primary data.
The process of refining research questions is aimed at ensuring that the project remains manageable
and that your resources of time, money and data are being put to the best use, in order to answer
important and relevant questions. Remember that it is usually better to do a smaller project
thoroughly than a larger project superficially. Refining the questions and finding the right scale for the
project requires careful judgement, and you should always discuss these issues with your supervisor.
It is also useful to document this process, so that you can explain how and why the research
questions have changed when writing up the dissertation.
Box 1.5 – Suggested Reading
Blaikie, N. (2000), The Logic of Anticipation, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Read Chapter Three (available on Canvas) for further guidance on research questions and
their objectives.
1.4.4 Examples of Research Topics and Questions
Here are a few examples or research topics and accompanying research questions:
Box 1.6 - Topic 1: Staff Turnover
Study Title:
‘Staff turnover in the public sector: A case study of hospital-based nurses in The
Philippines’
Research Questions:
1. Why do nurses leave their jobs?
2. How can staff turnover rates be reduced?
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
10
The first question is explanatory (a ‘why’ question). The second question is a ‘how’
question, which seeks to identify possible intervention strategies to reduce staff turnover
rates.
Box 1.7 - Topic 2: Water Management
Study Title:
‘Community management of water pumps in Malawi’
Research Questions:
1. What are the constraints to effective water pump management, faced by
communities?
2. Why do these constraints (if any) exist?
3. How can community management of water pumps in Malawi be improved?
The first question is descriptive, while the second is explanatory. The final question seeks
to identify strategies for change.
Box 1.8 - Topic 3: Fairtrade
Study Title:
‘Fairtrade and development: A case study of a Kenyan Fairtrade farm’
Research Questions:
1. Does Fairtrade reduce poverty in poor communities?
This is a single research question but actually quite a complex one, as it requires
consideration of the impact of Fairtrade initiatives on the wider community. Does
everyone benefit or do some people lose out? How does Fairtrade affect the poorest
farmers, who may not qualify to join the Fairtrade cooperatives?
1.4.5 Reflection Activity
The following reflection activity should help you to choose and refine your research questions
Box 1.9 - Reflection Activity: Choosing the Research Questions
Write down a list of all the potentially interesting and important questions that relate to
your chosen topic.
Decide whether each question is a ‘what’, ‘why’ or ‘how’ question.
For each question, ask yourself:



Why is this question important?
How does this question relate to the other questions?
Is this question researchable?
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
11
Hopefully, you are now left with no more than two or three. If you have too many, see if
you can eliminate a few more!
Put your questions into a logical order.
Remember, these questions are not set in stone. You may decide to make changes as the
study progresses.
1.5 The Role of a Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework (sometimes known as a theoretical framework) is a collection of
interrelated concepts which can help to explain the various relationships that may exist between
study variables and guide the choice of research questions, as well as providing a structure and
theoretical basis for the whole project. These concepts will normally emerge from your reading.
However, if you are aware of some relevant concepts from the outset, these may help to guide your
literature search. Using a conceptual framework can bring clarity and focus to the project, as well as
helping to make explicit what we already know and think about the topic.
Sometimes, the choice of conceptual framework will be quickly apparent, or even implicit within the
research question. For example, the social model of disability (Oliver, 1983), which views disability as
arising from society, was an obvious choice of conceptual framework for my study on ‘barriers to
employment of disabled people in Uganda’. These barriers would be viewed as disabling barriers
from a social model perspective. In some cases, it may be useful to select two or more conceptual
frameworks. For example, if you were studying women’s livelihood dynamics in Bangladesh, you
could draw on DFID’s (2001) Sustainable Livelihoods Framework and Kabeer’s (2002) concepts of
gender and intra-household resource distribution.
Do not worry if you are having difficulty with your conceptual framework, as this is quite a common
problem for experienced academics, let alone students. The first step is to try to identify relevant
theories and concepts from the literature. Having done this, consider how these relate to your
research questions. It is advisable to discuss the suitability of any conceptual framework that you are
considering with your supervisor.
Having decided on a conceptual framework, you should clearly define the concepts involved at the
outset. Then be sure to draw on these concepts throughout the dissertation, particularly in the
literature review, the methodology and when discussing the findings.
Box 1.10 - Reflection Activity: Choosing a Conceptual Framework
Write down some of the conceptual frameworks that you have come across so far, either
in the modules that you have completed, or in your reading.
Which of these, if any, may be relevant to your chosen dissertation topic?
If you have identified a conceptual framework, write down the key concepts covered by
the framework.
Consider how these key concepts relate to your study variables.
1.6 How to Structure a Dissertation Research Proposal
Your dissertation research proposal should describe what the proposed research will try to achieve,
how it will go about doing this and why this is useful, or valuable. In other words, the proposal
should explain your research, making it clear what you intend to do and how you will go about it,
and justify your research, giving valid reasons for carrying out the project.
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
12
The proposal should provide a detailed overview of your intended research within one to two pages.
Preparing the proposal should help you to think through your ideas and how they might develop into
a project. You are not committed to the proposal once written, and should expect it to change over
time, in consultation with your supervisor and as your own thinking develops. Careful consideration
should be given to each of the following points:
Box 1.11 - Proposal Criteria
1. Rationale for the Research
You should explain clearly why you have chosen your research topic, and why your
proposed research is valuable and needed. This may reflect your own role and
experience, as well as knowledge gleaned from relevant literature.
2. Research Question(s) or Hypotheses
You should identify one or more specific research questions that your research will try
to answer. These should be clearly achievable within the time and resources available and
bearing in mind the dissertation word limit. It is also important to think about which
types of questions can be answered with the methods that you are planning to use.
3. Situating the Proposed Topic Within Relevant Literature
You should explain how your proposed topic relates to existing literature, including
academic as well as ‘grey’, or policy, literature. What theories or concepts may be
relevant to your topic? Are there any key authors that you will draw on?
4. Case Study Choice (if appropriate)
You should consider whether the use of one or more case studies (which could be, for
example, particular organisations, projects or policies) would be appropriate for your
study. Any case study that you decide to use should be researchable within the
limitations of the study, in terms of time, access, finances and feasibility.
5. Methodology
You should consider which methods you intend to use, and why they are appropriate for
answering the research questions that you have identified. You should refer to proposed
sampling methods as well briefly describing how you will collect and analyse data. For
example, if you are planning to conduct interviews, who will you be targeting and why?
6. Awareness of Ethical Implications
Do you envisage any obvious, or less obvious, ethical implications? You should consider
the safety of yourself, as the researcher, as well as the safety and welfare of those
involved in the research.
7. Presentation of the Proposal
The proposal should be clearly written, logically structured and well presented, to essay
standard. If you have cited references these should be listed at the end.
Whilst these proposal criteria outline the basic requirements, there is some scope for variation, in
terms of content, structure and presentation, depending on the type of research that you are
planning to conduct. For example, qualitative research tends to be a little looser than quantitative
research at the planning stage, as strategic decisions will often be made as the study unfolds. The
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
13
need for flexibility can be made explicit in the proposal. It is also a good idea to identify one or more
preferred supervisors, if you have any, in the proposal. Here is an example of a typical basic
structure for a dissertation proposal:
Box 1.12 - Basic Structure for a Dissertation Proposal
1. Title
2. Introduction and Rationale
(Identification of the topic, how it was chosen and why it is important)
3. Research Question(s) or hypotheses.
4. The Literature
(A summary of the most important literature sources. You may also comment on any theories
or concepts that you plan to utilise)
5. Research Design
(Which research strategy you will be using, and how the project will be structured)
6. Methodology
(A description of methods to be used for sampling, data collection and analysis)
7. Ethical Considerations
8. Limitations
(It is helpful to comment on any particular limitations that you can identify at this stage)
9. References
1.7 Research Strategy: Deduction or Induction
Empirical data can be measured or observed, and can, therefore, be regarded as factual (or known
to be true). Theories, on the other hand, are explanations or predictions which can be supported by
data (or evidence). There are two basic ways of approaching the task of linking data and theories:
either start with the theory and collect data to test the theory (theory testing); or start with the
data and try to generate theory through the analysis of these data (theory building). These two
strategies are also known respectively as deduction and induction:
Deduction
Deduction is a strategy that can only be used when we have a theory to start with. From the theory,
we generate a hypothesis, which is a specific contention that a certain relationship exists between
two variables. We can then collect empirical data in order to test the hypothesis. By finding out
whether the hypothesis is true or not, we are effectively providing evidence as to whether or not
the theory is true.
Induction
Induction is a strategy that works in the opposite way, and is really the only choice when we have no
theory to start with. This is often the case when research is being carried out in a relatively new or
unusual field. The idea is to start by collecting data and then to analyse this data in order to detect
patterns, formulate testable hypotheses and, ultimately, to generate theory.
From these explanations, it is clear that the process of scientific research can be viewed as a circular
one, as illustrated below:
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
14
Figure 1.2: The Circular Process of Science
Hypothesis
Formulation
Observation
Theory
Development
Empirical
Generalisation
Source: Marshall (1997, p 18)
Consider the following example:
Box 1.13 - Deduction and Induction in Practice
Imagine that you want to conduct a research project on workplace stress at an
organisation that is undergoing restructuring:
Deductive Strategy:

You put forward the following hypothesis:
‘Stress levels are likely to increase when organisations are down-sizing,
because of job loss worries’

You identify an appropriate sample – one organisations that is downsizing and
one that is not.

You administer a questionnaire to a large sample of staff in both organisations.

In order to analyse the findings, you clarify how stress will be measured (for
example, days off due to sickness, requests for counselling, etc.).
Inductive Strategy:

You interview employees who are working in the organisation undergoing
downsizing, and conduct observation of the organisational context and the
atmosphere within the organisation. Perhaps also conduct focus group
discussions with groups of staff who have identified themselves as ‘stressed’.

You identify how participants perceive and define stress.
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
15

You generate hypotheses from your data. For example, you may uncover that
stress levels have occurred because employees are working harder as there are
fewer of them, rather than as a result of ‘job loss worries’.
This example shows how either a deductive or an inductive strategy can work for the same research
problem. Both strategies could lead to interesting and useful results, and neither strategy is
necessarily better than the other. The inductive approach is more open-ended and exploratory. The
deductive approach, on the other hand, is narrower and mainly focused on examining and testing the
hypothesis.
Your dissertation study may well involve both inductive and deductive reasoning strategies at some
stage, and this is quite normal. For example, you may start out with the aim of trying to collect data
in order to test a hypothesis (deductive strategy) but, as you go along, you may notice patterns or
regularities in the data that lead you to put forward new theories (inductive strategy). Alternatively,
you may find that the data that you need in order to test a particular hypothesis is not available, or
of sufficient quality - which may lead you to change your hypothesis, or to change your strategy
altogether (from deductive to inductive).
This is all fine, because it is very unusual for a research study to go along exactly as planned from
beginning to end. The important thing is to document the strategic decisions that you have made,
and the reasons for any changes in strategy, so that you can reflect on these when you write up the
dissertation.
1.8 Research Philosophy
A research philosophy is a particular way of looking at the world, which guides the research
techniques that you use. It is useful to have an awareness of the main research philosophies, so that
you can adopt an approach to your dissertation project which is based on logical reasoning which
you feel comfortable with and can explain to others. Neuman (1994, Chapter Four) provides a very
good explanation of the three major research philosophies – positivism, interpretive social science,
and critical social science – that are briefly described in this section.
1.8.1 Positivism
Positivism is a long-established research philosophy, stemming from the work of the philosopher
Auguste Comte, a founding father of sociology. The underlying principle is that social phenomena
should be treated in the same way as physical matter. As in the natural sciences, the purpose of
scientific research is to provide explanations in the form of universal laws. This implies that
researchers should adopt an objective, neutral standpoint and that only those phenomena that are
observable, either directly through experience or observation, or indirectly by the use of
instruments, can be regarded as knowledge (Johnson, 1986). Adopting a neutral position means that
researchers should avoid making value judgements, as these may impinge upon their objectivity.
Positivism is usually associated with deductive research strategies. Theory is used to generate
hypothesis/hypotheses, data is collected to test these, and reality is deduced from these findings.
This reality is assumed to be objective, dispassionate and verifiable by others.
Positivist researchers tend to favour the use of quantitative data, normally collected on a wide scale
and in a structured way, such as through the use of structured surveys. A large amount of data is
usually required to accurately test a hypothesis, and representative samples may be used to
represent a wider population. Having said this, there is no reason why qualitative data cannot also be
used within a positivist research design.
Positivism has attracted wide-ranging criticism. Critics argue that:
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
16

social phenomena exists in the minds and interpretations of people, and is not ‘out there’ to
be measured, as suggested by positivists;

social reality is a subjective experience and not objective;

quantitative measurements are inadequate to capture the complexity and meaning of social
behaviour;

researchers can never be neutral, and neither can they be ‘value-free’;

people have wishes, perceptions and interests, as opposed to physical objects measured by
natural science;

positivists treat people who are the subjects of research as objects, rather than as partners
in the research process; and

objectivity is neither possible nor desirable.
1.8.2 Interpretive Social Science
This approach, which stems from the work of Max Weber, is based on the understanding that social
reality varies from one person to another (and from one society to another), and is created though
people’s own subjective experiences and social interactions. People attach their own meanings to
the ever-changing social environment in which they live, and act according to these meanings. In
other words, there is no ‘objective’ or ‘independent’ social reality. According to this philosophy,
social research should seek to discover how people understand and experience the social world
themselves. The ultimate aim of interpretive research, therefore, is not to generate universal laws of
behaviour, but to understand the different ways in which those being studied interpret the world.
The interpretive approach implies getting close to the research subjects as opposed to the ‘outsider
looking in’ stance of positivists. The main implications for research are as follows:

An inductive approach, which seeks to generate theory through the analysis of data. This,
however, does not negate the use of theory, especially for orientation purposes. Even
hypotheses are sometimes used.

Qualitative data and less structured data collection methods, such as in-depth interviews and
focus group discussions, are generally favoured. However, quantitative data may also be
used, and some degree of structure (as in semi-structured interviews) may be imposed to
keep the research focused.

Sample sizes are usually smaller (due to the need to study people and their behaviour in
depth, in order to really understand how they experience and interpret their own realities).
Sampling processes are often less rigorous (e.g. purposive sampling), which means that the
representativeness of subjects is less certain and it may be harder to generalise findings.

Understanding context is important. Since all social actions take place within a particular
social context, it is important to understand that context, and to take account of the
influence of contextual factors on people and their behaviour.

Since researchers cannot be value-free, the values (of both researcher and subjects) should
be made explicit. However, judgements should not be made as to which values are superior.
1.8.3
Critical Social Science
This philosophy, which stems from the work of radical social thinkers such as Karl Marx and
Sigmund Freud, offers an alternative perspective. Within this paradigm, social science is perceived as
“a critical process of enquiry that goes beyond surface illusions to uncover the real structures in the
material world in order to help people change conditions and build a better world for themselves”
(Neuman, 1994, p. 67)
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
17
Social reality, according to this perspective, is created - or at least strongly influenced - by underlying
structures and power relations. Surface appearances may conceal reality, thereby reinforcing these
structures and power relations. The critical social scientist aims to uncover society’s hidden
structures of power and influence, in order to bring about social change and empower people to
improve their situations, especially those who are marginalised. Digging beneath the surface may not
be easy, as simple observation may not be sufficient to reveal hidden reality. Therefore, the critical
social scientist asks probing questions and looks at how situations have evolved over time, in order
to delve beneath the surface.
Critical social science, therefore, seeks to highlight the social forces that influence people’s lives.
While positivism tends to view these forces as unchanging universal laws, critical social science
focuses on the historical background against which these forces have developed, and believes that
they can be changed. In order to bring this about, however, researchers need to align themselves
with those that are oppressed, and seek to empower them by revealing the truth to them. This is
very different from the interpretive approach, which seeks to understand people and their lives but
not to judge them. The critical social scientist will explicitly share the values of those that they seek
to empower and oppose the values of ‘the oppressors’. For example, much feminist research has
been based on this perspective and aimed at destroying the myth - reinforced through
discriminatory legislation, policies, customs and attitudes - that women are inferior to men. In doing
so, feminist research has played an important role in bringing about greater equality for women in
many parts of the world.
1.8.4 Putting the three approaches into practice
The three approaches examined above are based on differing assumptions about what social reality
is and what social science research is for. However, it is quite common for researchers to adopt
different standpoints, depending on the study they are engaged in, or even to combine elements of
all three approaches within the same study. However, each of these research philosophies implies
approaching a research problem in a slightly different way from the outset, as the following example
illustrates:
Box 1.14 - The Three Approaches in Practice
Research
Topic
Discrimination and job competition between Aborigines and non-Aborigines in
the Australian outback.
Positivist
Approach
 Identify a theory about majority-minority relations in general
 Deduce an hypothesis from the theory
 Gather secondary data, such as Government statistics, and perhaps conduct a
survey, in order to obtain data on the key variables contained within the
hypothesis. These may include the proportion of Aborigines versus nonAborigines employed in particular jobs, or certain visible causes of
discrimination.
 Use the data to test the hypothesis, and hence provide evidence to support,
or refute, the theory’s predictions about the degree and causes of
discrimination
Interpretive
Approach
 Observe and interview selected people from both Aboriginal and nonAboriginal communities within the Australian outback.
 Analyse data obtained to determine how each group feel about discrimination
and job competition: Do they feel it is a problem? What are the causes of
discrimination? Should it be reduced? How can it be reduced?
 Interpret the findings so that others can understand what has been learnt
from the study.
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
18
 You may put forward tentative hypotheses and theories, based on the
findings, but will probably be reluctant to generalise the findings beyond the
social context studied.
Critical
Approach
 Begin by examining the wider social and historical context. This may include
factors such as the destruction of Aboriginal culture by British colonisers, the
political and education systems in Australia, and the way in which modern
society in Australia is organised.
 Make enquiries from a moral or critical standpoint: Does society discriminate
against Aborigines in the jobs market? Are Aborigines economically exploited?
 Examine various sources to expose uneven power relations and identify
underlying patterns of discrimination and exploitation. This may include
examining statistical information on income differences and employment rates
between the two groups, personally examining living situations, observing
aspects of job recruitment processes (such as job interviews), or conducting
surveys.
 Having identified discrimination and established likely causes, publish findings
widely and pass on the findings to organisations that represent Aborigines in
the Australian outback, in order to empower the marginalised group and
promote social change.
Adapted from Neuman, 1994, p. 74
Box 1.15 – Suggested Reading
Neuman, W. L. (1994) Social Science Research Methods: Qualitative and
Quantitative Approaches, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Read Chapter 4 (available in the module folder on Canvas) in order to deepen your
understanding of each of the philosophical standpoints – positivism, interpretive social
science and critical social science – that have been described in this section.
1.9 Research Design
According to De Vaus, the purpose of a research design is:
“.. to ensure that the evidence obtained enables us to answer the initial question as unambiguously as
possible” (2001, p. 9).
The research design, therefore, can be likened to a strategic plan which sets out the steps that will
be taken to answer one or more research questions. These steps may include: identifying the
research strategy to be adopted, the types of data to be collected, and the methodological
approaches to collecting the data.
This section describes four basic types of research design. Your choice of design will depend very
much on the types of questions that you are trying to answer and the practical constraints with
which you are faced. Some design strategies, such as ethnography, have not been included, since they
generally involve a prolonged period of field research, which is unlikely to be feasible within the
timeframe that you have for your dissertation.
Before looking at the basic design types, it is worth defining two important design concepts:
Internal Validity
This measures the extent to which a research design ensures that causal claims are valid (De
Vaus, 2001). One obvious threat to internal validity is the presence of variable factors which
have not been fully taken account of. For example, if a study sets out to investigate the
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
19
impact of certain diets on child obesity levels, it is essential to take account of non-dietary
factors (such as exercise levels) which may also have an impact on obesity.
External Validity
This measures the extent to which any conclusions from a study can be generalised from a
sample population to a more general population. Clearly, the larger and more representative
a sample is, within a research design, the greater the external validity is likely to be. Studies
which are set within a specific social context are often influenced by local, or contextual,
factors, which may limit the generalisability of study findings to other social contexts.
No study is likely to achieve 100% internal or external validity. It is important, however, to design
your research in a way that takes account of these issues, in order to produce findings that are as
valid as possible. Where there are possible threats or limitations to internal or external validity, then
these should be acknowledged. Variable factors that cannot be fully taken account of should be
identified, and researchers should always be cautious about making generalisations.
1.9.1
Experimental Design
Experimental designs are generally aimed at determining the effect which one variable (the
independent variable) has on another one (the dependent variable). This is usually the most effective,
or rigorous, way of testing a hypothesis that X causes Y (for example, smoking causes lung cancer).
In order to ensure that the experiment is internally valid, however, the researcher needs to find a
way of holding all other variables constant, so as to isolate the impact of the independent variable on
the dependent variable.
Experimental designs usually involve the following features:

one pre-set measure of the dependent variable;

two groups, one which is tested and the other a control group;

random allocation to the groups before the test.
Experimental designs are often well suited to studying the impact of specific interventions, such as a
planned development project. The main problem, however, is that it may be difficult to set up
experiments in the real world. One way to avoid this problem is to use a ‘natural experiment’ which
focuses on an event that will occur naturally. For example, if one class in a school is planning to
introduce a particular teaching method, it may be possible to investigate the impact of this new
method by collecting data before and after the new method is introduced, and comparing this with
data collected from another class within the school (the control group) where the new method has
not been introduced. One likely limitation of a natural experiment, of course, is that it may be
impossible to randomly allocate research subjects to one group or another, as the groups are likely
to pre-exist.
One particular danger associated with all experimental designs is the ‘Hawthorne Effect’ (or the
tendency for people to temporarily change their behaviour or performance because they know that
they are being observed). This can only really be completely avoided if the subjects do not know that
they are being observed, but such an approach may well raise huge ethical dilemmas!
1.9.2
Case Study Design
A case study involves the in-depth study of a single case. The case itself, which becomes the unit of
analysis for the study, could be a particular organisation, project, intervention, process, or other
phenomenon occurring in a specific setting. For example, you could examine a flood mitigation
scheme in a city that is prone to flooding, such as Rio de Janiero, or you could examine the impact of
a new government land reform policy in a particular region of South Sudan.
The case study is a very flexible type of research design, allowing for a wide range of data collection
methods, in order to build up as complete a picture of each case as possible. Building the picture
tends to involve gathering data from a diverse range of respondents (sometimes known as
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
20
‘stakeholders’, as they have a particular interest in the case, whether or not they are directly
involved). Various stakeholders are likely to view the case from differing perspectives - thus
providing a more rounded picture for the researcher. The case study may involve gathering
information on the local context, especially local factors that are likely to impact on the case. For
example, if your case study is focused on a scheme designed to promote employment among people
with albinism living in a semi-rural district of Tanzania, you would probably need to take into account
the nature of local employment markets and the impact of local community attitudes towards people
with albinism. It is also common to build up a historical background of the case, either through
participant interviews or studying relevant documents, thus giving the case study a time dimension
(as opposed to being merely a ‘snapshot’ view).
The following boxed text provides more detailed guidance on case studies, which have tended to be
a very popular choice of research design among past students:
Box 1.16 - Doing Case Studies
Many students choose to do case studies for their dissertations - particularly if they are
planning to carry out some form of field-based research, typically interviewing people or
collecting information from local sources. This is usually a very worthwhile approach (the
Harvard Business School is supposed to have built its MBA programmes around it) and
many of the best dissertations we have seen are case studies in one form or another; but,
doing a case study requires some understanding of what it can do, what it cannot do, and
what are the limitations of the approach.
Firstly, what is a case study? It is actually quite a loose concept. Definitions talk about a
study of a single "setting" (see Ehrenhardt's 1989 paper below), a single location, problem,
context or process. So, business schools might encourage the case study of a single
company, or law schools a single court case. In the development field, we might be talking
about a study of a single country: Somalia: a case study in conflict resolution, for example - or
a single village (women borrowers in Mlolo village, Zambia: a case study of empowerment) - or
a single process (the gender sensitive curriculum; a case study of educational reform). Generally,
the bigger the problem or process, the bigger the unit of study. The idea of "singleness" of studying a specific example or situation - is essential to the idea of the case study even
though, as you can imagine, exactly where a study of a single village, or a single conflict,
begins to shade into a more general study of rural change, or the causes of conflict, is not
always easy to define.
What is not a case study? The alternatives are equally loosely defined, but they can usually
be recognised. A history of a development policy (for example, structural adjustment) is
not a case study. How structural adjustment worked in Ghana might be, however. A survey
of the link between women's vocational education and employment in Africa is not a case
study. A discussion of the relationship between international and local NGOs using
evidence from a number of both is not a case study. In all these cases, there is no
"singleness", no one location, no one example but many. Research which tries to come to
general conclusions through some sort of statistical analysis may, or may not, be case
studies; for example, a study of the increase in incomes and welfare following fair trade
certification, based upon a range of interviews of members of coffee cooperatives in a
number of countries, would not be a case study, but Community and Coffee in Ruhamba
district; a case study of the fair-trade premium would be.
Students choose the case study approach for a number of reasons. Probably, the
commonest is that it enables them to work in their own country, or another country that
interests them. The idea of studying in some depth a particular place or problem is also
appealing, as is the possibility of spending time face-to-face with people, getting the facts
first hand as it were. Even where the research is desk-based, the idea of being able to focus
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
21
upon a particular place or problem, rather than generalising the investigation across a topic
as a whole, remains attractive. Focus means not just looking at the immediate cause and
effect of, say, the abolition of user charges upon services at a particular hospital, or perhaps
hospitals, in a particular town. This is likely to be more patients but also more treatments.
Focus also means looking at the impact of international policies and institutions, the local
political environment in which this has happened, the actors involved from hospital
director to patient, the effect upon ancillary services or the role of civil society. Focussing
upon a single case helps to disentangle the complex patterns of cause and effect that are
responsible for poverty, vulnerability and disempowerment. It is much easier to work these
out in a case study than in a statistical survey of the relationships, for example, between
land ownership and income.
In a sense, case studies embody the problem tree approach to understanding outcomes.
They can chart multiple causes, establish hierarchies for those causes and explain
unpredicted outcomes better sometimes than the statistics can. Take a study about why
girls in rural areas in developing countries drop out of school so often. All the school
registers will be able to tell you is how many have dropped out, at what age they drop out
and whether this correlates with, for example, family income, if we use parents'
occupations as a proxy for income. A case study, however, enables us to look at the
interactions between an unfriendly environment, bad teaching, the distance to school, the
likelihood of harassment, patriarchal attitudes, the opportunity costs of schooling and the
community's belief that a girl is only going to get married so why waste money. And to do
this in a way which encourages a degree of analytical and sometimes quite sophisticated
thinking about cause and consequence.
Case studies enable a student to use a range of data collection methods. These can be
desk-based research, of course, but also field research methods which range from
interviews (which are typically semi-structured), to focus groups, and other techniques for
participatory investigation. Sometimes, a case study enables the researcher to use the
classic social anthropology method of sitting and watching, trying to understand events
through the eyes of those involved. Case studies make triangulation easier, that is, getting
and comparing different views of the same event or outcome.
But, case studies bring problems with them. The first, though not the most important
problem, is: a case study of what? Students have been known to begin thinking about their
research topic in terms of ‘I want to do a case study of Haiti’, perhaps because they see
the country as one with major development problems aggravated by natural disasters, and
one they should research. This is not the way to do it and, if a student raises the idea with
the supervisor, the response is likely to be: what is the study a case of? Is it the impact of
the Clean Development Mechanism in reducing carbon emissions? Is it the impact of
tourism on remote islands? What is your research question? This takes us outside the
immediate concern of this discussion but it is worth repeating that thinking through the
question - what is it, what are the variables involved, how do I perceive the question, what
are the cause and effect mechanisms that seem to be involved, what do I think is not well
understood, what objectives might I have in the analysis - all these need to be taken into
account very carefully before any thought is given to where it might be studied.
Say you are interested in market led land reform, that is, reform left to some form of
market mechanism rather than State redistribution. In thinking about the problem, you
need to understand what it is, why some countries (for example, South Africa) have
attempted it, who are the international actors of importance (no prizes for guessing the
World Bank is involved), what do the academics think about it, what are the questions that
all this raises. One obvious one is the contradiction in poor people trying to buy expensive
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
22
land. Once you have a problem, you can look for somewhere to study it – the case study
– but only then.
The second, and perhaps the more important, problem is typicality: how far is the setting
or location of the study typical in a meaningful sense of the problem or process or situation
being studied. The term sometimes used is "critical case". How far can the case study's
findings enable you to generalise to the larger world in which it is set? Imagine you are a
supervisor and a student comes to you with the following proposal:
I am going to study the financial and social situation of tomato growers. I want
to find out whether small scale tomato production generates real incomes,
reduces vulnerability and provides sustainable livelihoods to producers. My data
collection approach will combine semi-structured interviews of growers and focus
groups. My case study location is the South Pole.
At this point you will say: the South Pole? The student responds that “Indeed you can grow
tomatoes at the South Pole, at least during the Polar summer because they are grown
within the buildings of the research station there. Scientists grow them.” But, typical of
tomato growers worldwide? Obviously not.
There is no easy way of getting round the problem of typicality. There is, however, an
approach that usually works, and that is to explore the problem in general first: establish
a picture of what seems to be typical or characteristic in terms of, say the relationship
between vocational training content and employment/incomes; and then justify the case
study choice in that it fits the picture. The literature review is the place for the typical
picture and the methodology chapter (if you have one) for the justification of the case. For
example, say that you are interested in the role of street theatre as a means of
communicating development messages, and you plan to produce a case study of this type
of theatre in a particular city. In the literature review, you will be looking at what has been
written about the form street theatre takes, what the content of performances is, what is
known about impact and outcomes; and this is the information you need when you come
to the methodology section, in order to justify your choice of study location. You do not
always have to claim typicality, of course, if the situation you want to study is innovative,
but you must make it clear if this is the case.
If a case study is indeed typical of the general problem or situation, can you turn the
process around and use it to contribute to theory? Yes, of course you can, and the
conclusion of a case study is the usual place for this. Your literature review and
methodology explore the research question which you have taken into the case study. The
conclusion summarises the answer and then, in the best of dissertations, comes back to
the literature review and says, yes, the research of so and so, or the mechanism proposed
by so and so, seem to be true; or, even more interestingly, not true. Or, most interesting
of all, there is something new to add.
Take the street theatre research described above. This was a dissertation several years
ago in which the author took into the fieldwork the assumption made in the fairly limited
literature that development messages would include: send your children to school, boil
baby's milk, get vaccinated against TB, use mosquito nets, and so on. In fact, most of the
street performances had one subject: HIV. The student took this very interesting outcome
further. Why? “Because that is what the donors pay for” came the replies from the NGOs
who delivered the theatre. This is how case study research contributes to our general
understanding and, if we are building a theory of development communication, enriches
that too.
There is a quite a lot of reading on the case study approach, if you want to take things
further, and it is certainly worth a reference in your methodology section to one or two
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
23
of the academic texts. The standard reference is R.K Yin's Case study research: design
and methods (Sage, 2009, latest edition), cited by nearly everybody. Eisenhardt's paper
on ‘Building theories from case study research’ (Academy of Management Review,
1989) is helpful on that crucial link between theorising and the study. Flyvbjerg's paper,
‘Five misunderstandings about case study research’ (Qualitative Inquiry, 2006) refutes
the criticisms frequently made of case study based research. In the non-academic world,
the Wikipedia entry is not bad, if you can cope with the unhelpful writing. DFID have a site
with case studies of their projects although you will soon see that they are perhaps less
critical about the outcomes than we would like students to be.
John Watson, IDD
1.9.3
Comparative Design
Comparative designs involve a comparison between two or more cases, usually at the same time or
within a short timeframe. The idea is to make comparisons between the cases in order to address
your research question or questions. As with single case studies, there is scope for a wide range of
data collection methods, including questionnaire surveys, interviews, focus groups and observation.
In order to make valid comparisons, however, it is important to be consistent in your choice of
methods for examining each case. Conducting multiple case studies can be very time-consuming, and
you are likely to sacrifice depth by choosing to do more than one case study. You should also
remember that the word count limits for a dissertation are often reached surprisingly quickly, as you
will discover when you come to the writing up stage!
If you choose to do a comparative study you must be able to justify your selection of cases, and
explain why they can usefully be compared. There should usually be a significant amount of common
ground shared by the cases, otherwise it may be extremely difficult to make valid comparisons.
1.9.4
Longitudinal Design
Longitudinal design involves repeated measures of the same variables for the same group (or case
study), over an extended period of time (often years). The main purpose of such a design is to
measure change over time. Longitudinal designs can make use of statistical data, so may be a
potential choice for those conducting desk-based studies. For example, a longitudinal study on UK
divorce patterns could involve examining official divorce rate statistics for each decade over the past
fifty years. The aim of such a study could be to describe the trends that emerge from the statistics,
and then, perhaps, to examine various factors that may help to explain the trends, such as changes in
legislation or societal values.
1.9.5
Combining Design Strategies
There is some overlap between the basic research design strategies described above, and your own
research design may involve a combination of strategies. For example, imagine that your research
focuses on a restructuring process within an organisation. Assuming that a control group (that is, an
organisation not undergoing restructuring) is also involved, and that data is collected from each
organisation before the process begins and after the process is completed, then this would basically
be an experimental design (the restructuring process can be viewed as a ‘natural experiment’).
However, since data is to be collected from the each organisation at two separate points in time,
which may be several months apart, the design also has a longitudinal element. There is also a
comparative element, since a comparison will be made between the two organisations.
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
24
Box 1.17 – Suggested Reading
De Vaus, D. (2001), Research Design in Social Research, London: Sage.
Read Chapter One (in the module folder on Canvas) for a deeper understanding of the
main principles of research design.
1.10 Pause for thought
Consider the following questions, which may help you to reflect on the content of these notes:
1. What are the main differences between inductive and deductive research, and why is the
distinction important. Would you consider your proposed study deductive or inductive?
2. What are the main differences between positivism, interpretive social science and critical
social science? Why is it important to understand research philosophies?
3. Is it possible, or even desirable, to carry out ‘objective research’?
4. What is the role of ‘values’ in research? In your view, should researchers be explicit about
their values?
Dissertation Handbook Part 1: Preparing the research proposal
25
Part 2: Doing the Literature Review
The literature review is a vital part of virtually every academic research study, because it links the
individual study, which is usually narrow and focused, with existing knowledge in the field. It can be
viewed as the foundation upon which the rest of the study is developed, setting out the broader
context and exploring the relevant concepts and variables. This part of the handbook first examines
the nature of the literature review, before going on to cover the various steps involved in carrying
one out. These include searching for the literature, deciding which literature to include, managing
the literature, critically reviewing the literature, synthesizing the literature and, finally, writing up the
review.
Box 2.1 – Questions for reflection
As you read through these notes, consider the following questions:
2.1

What is the difference between a ‘literature survey’ and a ‘literature review’?

How can you ensure that your literature search is both systematic and thorough?

At what stage should you stop reading and start writing?

How can the literature review be linked to the rest of the dissertation?
What is a Literature Review?
The literature review can be defined as follows:
“The selection of available documents (both published and unpublished) on the topic, which contain
information, ideas, data and evidence written from a particular standpoint to fulfil certain aims or
express certain views on the nature of the topic and how it is to be investigated, and the effective
evaluation of these documents in relation to the research being proposed” (Hart, 1998, p. 13).
As this definition implies, a literature review entails a thorough examination and interpretation of
material (mainly written) that is relevant to one’s research topic. In some cases, it may be the main
component of a study, but it is often a background for other forms of research. For your
dissertation, you will need to undertake a literature review in order to critically examine what is
already known about the topic, to show how you have arrived at the research question(s) you are
posing, and also to enable you to identify the best approaches to addressing your question(s). The
literature review should go beyond summarising the relevant material to critiquing the arguments
put across and formulating your own arguments.
The main purposes of the literature review are as follows:
To establish the context of the topic, or problem
Your research topic, or problem, should be placed within its relevant theoretical and practical
context. This makes it possible to see where the problem is coming from and how it fits within
existing knowledge.
To rationalise the study
Research requires resources, including time and effort, and hence must be justified. This is done by
using literature to demonstrate the importance and urgency of the research problem under
investigation.
To identify knowledge gaps
The whole purpose of research is to generate knowledge: so you need to know what knowledge
already exists. The literature review should help you to identify knowledge gaps, warranting further
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
26
research, in your particular field. Remember, however, that you are unlikely to be able to address
major knowledge gaps within the scope of a Master’s dissertation. It may be sufficient, for example,
to simply identify ways in which previous research referred to in the literature could be done in a
slightly different way, or within a different context.
To discover important variables and concepts relevant to the topic
Usually, the research process starts with a research problem, which is generally broad and thus not
easy to measure empirically. Identifying the key variables and concepts enables us to focus the
research.
To synthesize and gain a new perspective
Social sciences, in particular, are characterised by different - often conflicting - perspectives or
understandings of given phenomena. By reviewing and comparing these perspectives, it may be
possible to develop new insights that are only possible when each piece of relevant information is
viewed together. Each single piece of research contributes just part of the bigger picture, and should
not be viewed in isolation.
To acquire the subject vocabulary
Virtually every discipline has its own terminology and vocabulary. It is important to have a correct
understanding of the terms and concepts used.
To review past research
By reviewing relevant research papers, it will be possible to see how studies in your area have been
conducted in the past, possibly highlighting methodologies that may be useful for your own purposes.
This may also help with identifying areas that require further research (or knowledge gaps). Do not
worry if you find that similar studies to your proposed one have been conducted in the past. It is
very likely that previous studies will be set in a slightly different context (a different location, or using
a differently composed sample, for example), which means that your study should be able to
produce some new insights to the topic.
There are typically three main stages in the literature review process:
1. Searching for the literature
2. Critically analysing and synthesising the literature
3. Writing up the review
However, the process is not usually a linear one. There tends to be continuous movement back and
forth between all three stages. For example, analysing the literature that you have found in your
initial search will almost always lead to you identifying further important literature. Similarly, the
process of writing up the review will usually lead to the identification of areas where further
literature is needed, or perhaps further analysis of the literature that you already have.
Box 2.2 – Suggested Reading
Hart, C. (1998), Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science
Imagination. London: Sage.
Read Chapter One (pages 1 - 25) in order to deepen your understanding of the role of
the literature review in research and the skills required to do this task well.
2.2
Which Literature is Relevant?
You will need to search for literature that is relevant to the particular research problem that you
are seeking to address, the various themes that are likely to arise as you investigate the problem and
the broader theoretical debates within which your research topic is situated. For example, if your
study was focused on a development project aimed at supporting women’s self-help groups in India,
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
27
you might start by looking for literature on similar development projects designed to develop or
support self-help groups, in India or in other countries. You could then broaden your search by
looking for literature relating to more general topics such as gender and development, women’s
empowerment, participatory development and the history of self-help groups, all of which are likely
to be relevant to your study.
There are various kinds of literature that may be relevant to your research topic. The availability of
information on most topics is rapidly increasing, due to an increased emphasis on the need for
evidence-based practice and the expansion of internet sources (Aveyard, 2007). One of the first
tasks, therefore, will be to distinguish between various types of information, in order to determine
which data is of sufficient quality, and which is most relevant to your research objectives. This
section examines the various categories of information that you might consider.
2.2.1 Published Empirical/Primary Research Studies
These will usually be among the most important types of literature to consider, as they will describe
previous studies that have involved attempting to answer a specific research question by using an
accepted scientific method, including the collection of raw data. Published research is usually of high
quality, having been stringently reviewed by publishers and peer reviewers prior to publication. It
should be noted, however, that some published articles do not discuss methodology in much detail.
As a result, it may be difficult to verify the validity or reliability of the methods used and data
obtained to back the arguments put forward.
2.2.2 Published Non-empirical Literature
Understanding a particular social phenomenon usually requires a good grasp of the context within
which it is occurring. So, published work on social, cultural, political or economic context can
provide useful background material. Relevant literature may include, for example, discussion papers,
official reports and articles or books that offer ‘expert opinion’.
Published statistics or surveys are often useful. These may originate from censuses, national sample
surveys or various collections of economic and social indicators, such as the Human Development
Index. This type of data is potentially useful in providing background information on the study area
or sector. However, it is important to understand how the information was collected and analysed,
in order to accurately assess the reliability and relevance of the data to your own research topic.
2.2.3
Grey Literature
In general terms, grey literature refers to literature that has not been published in the mainstream
publishing market (books and journals). Most grey literature, in fact, has not been published at all.
There is a broad spectrum of literature that falls into this category, including:

Reports
These may include reports produced by government agencies, private companies and nongovernmental organisations. They may cover all kinds of topics, such as organisational
systems and procedures, technical matters, impact assessments and feasibility studies.

Newsletters, brochures, websites
These are usually focused on generating interest in particular topics, or publicising the work
of the organisations that produce them. They should be used with caution, as they may lack
objectivity!

Working papers
These may include discussion papers, project proposals and evaluation reports. International
development agencies, such as the World Bank, UNDP and DFID, regularly produce
working papers that can easily be accessed on their websites.

Conference papers and addresses
These documents can often shed light on the latest developments within a particular field.
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
28

Administrative records
These include various documents that record decisions and activities, such as minutes of
meetings, agendas, diary entries, company organisation charts, financial statements, court
records and memoranda. These may be particularly useful in longitudinal studies or ‘before
and after’ studies, as well as studies that focus on organisations and/or policy processes.
Care should be taken, however, as there may be issues around confidentiality and
permission to access these documents. It is also important to understand the procedures
used to compile the records, in order to ascertain their quality and usefulness.

Media reports
The mass media is perhaps the greatest producer of documentary material in modern
societies. Media reports may include newspaper articles and press releases, as well as T.V.
documentaries, interviews and news reports. In some countries, however, media reports
may be subject to strict censorship.

Past dissertations and theses
These can be very useful in terms of showing how other students have tackled similar
studies to your own. However, you would not normally refer directly to unpublished
dissertations in a literature review, unless there is something of particular relevance which
cannot be found in a published source. Some past IDD dissertations of a high standard are
available on Canvas.
Grey materials often provide detailed information, containing original data and information on
operational work. They can provide insight into issues and current policies/programmes, as well as
organisations and their relations with stakeholders. Much grey literature is produced and released
very quickly, providing up-to-date information that is often missing in conventional published
literature, due to the lengthy editing and publishing processes involved.
Grey materials also tend to have various shortcomings, however, and should generally be used with
caution. Some of the limitations include:

Grey literature is often of a practical nature, rather than theoretical or academic.

They can be of very poor quality – often there are limited quality assurance systems in the
organisations producing these materials.

They may be undated (in which case you must reference the document as ‘undated’), and
the author may not be apparent.

Because the purpose for which these materials are compiled is likely to be completely
different from your own research agenda, they may not be directly relevant.

Grey materials are often products of commissioned work, which may have an agenda and
hence not be objective. Commissioned work also tends to reflect existing power relations
and is unlikely to be too critical of the status quo.

Grey literature tends to focus on specific problems at hand, often giving no context or
background to the problems being addressed. The context is assumed to be understood, but
this is often not the case, unless the reader belongs to the target audience or has been
actively involved with the process of developing the material in one way or another.

Grey literature tends to focus on short-term problems, and thus may become outdated
relatively quickly.
Despite these limitations, there are many instances where grey materials will help to shed some light
on your research problem, and their inclusion may help to add depth and breadth to your literature
review. If you do use grey literature, be sure to discuss the potential shortcomings, or limitations, of
any piece that you include, in order to show that you recognise these weaknesses.
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
29
2.2.4
Hierarchy of Evidence
It is clear that some types of literature are likely to be stronger than others, in terms of the weight
that they should be given within a particular literature review. It should be possible, therefore, to
develop a ‘hierarchy of evidence’, which ranks the usefulness or importance of particular types of
literature, in relation to your research topic and design. For example, imagine that your study
focuses on the experiences and perceptions prevalent within a community of Tibetan people living in
northern India. Your hierarchy of evidence may look something like this:
Box 2.3 - Example of a ‘Hierarchy of Evidence’
1. Qualitative studies focused on the Tibetan diaspora in India (particularly
ethnographic studies or those based on in-depth interviews).
2. Qualitative studies focused on the Tibetan diaspora generally.
3. Qualitative studies focused on non-Tibetan exile communities (for comparison).
4. Published non-empirical literature on the history of the Tibetan diaspora.
5. Grey literature produced by organisations working with the Tibetan diaspora.
6. Media reports focused on the Tibetan diaspora.
7. Anecdotal evidence.
The ‘hierarchy of evidence’ will obviously vary from one topic to another. For example, if your study
focuses on how the media reports a particular issue, such as an election process, then relevant
media reports are likely to be more useful than empirical research papers when it comes to
addressing your research questions. So, media reports would be at the top of your hierarchy.
Having decided on a ‘hierarchy of evidence’, it is important not to discount some types of evidence
simply because they are low on the list. Most literature reviews will aim to include a range of
different types of literature, so the list should simply be viewed as a guide to help with the
prioritising one piece of evidence over another.
Box 2.4 – Reflection Activity: Creating a Hierarchy of Evidence
In relation to your own dissertation, think about the various types of literature that may
help you to address your research questions.
List these literature types in order of importance, or usefulness, so as to develop your
own ‘hierarchy of evidence’, specifically geared to your topic and research design.
2.3
Searching for Literature
Having decided on your research topic, and determined which types of evidence are likely to be
most useful, your search for literature begins. There are numerous ways of finding relevant
literature, and you will probably need to adopt a range of strategies. It is important to document the
strategies that you use, so that you can describe and evaluate these processes when you write up
the dissertation. You should be able to demonstrate that your search has been both systematic and
thorough. This section will highlight some of the most common search strategies.
2.3.1
Books and Journal Articles
Many literature reviews rely heavily on journal articles, which allow for a wide range of sources and
perspectives to be reviewed within a relatively short space of time. For many topics, however, the
most in-depth and important literature contributions are to be found in books. It may well be worth
reading at least a couple of books that are particularly relevant to your topic, perhaps as a
preliminary stage before accessing a wider range of sources. Reading books and journal articles
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
30
should help you to identify and understand the main arguments, concepts and theories within and
around your topic, as well as highlighting other relevant literature.
2.3.2
Electronic Databases
Electronic databases have become an increasingly important source of academic literature in recent
years, which has made the process of searching for relevant and up-to-date information much easier.
Through the University e-library, it is possible to access a huge range of databases. So, the first step
is to determine which are most relevant to your research topic. You will probably identify useful
literature more easily by targeting the most relevant databases, rather than trying to search all the
available databases at once. If you select the ‘advanced search’ option when you enter the e-library,
followed by ‘Database Search’ from the tab at the top of the page, you will be able to browse
through an alphabetical list of databases and search through those that seem most relevant to your
topic. Box 2.5 below lists some of the available databases that are often particularly useful:
Box 2.5 - Useful Electronic Databases for International Development
Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)
Economic and Social Research Council
ELDIS
International Development Research Centre
ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
SCOPUS
Social Sciences Citation Index (ISI)
Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
Swetwise
Web of Science (ISI)
You may find other databases in the e-library that are even more geared to your particular topic
area. For example, if your study focuses on a country in Sub-Saharan Africa, you could look at the
‘Africa South of the Sahara’ database.
Having selected the databases, the next step is to identify key words that relate to your topic, and
then use these to start searching. There is plenty of guidance on the University website, as well as an
email helpdesk to assist with particular queries. As you continue searching, it is likely that new
keywords will become apparent, thus enabling you to identify further relevant items. As you search
across various databases you should find that the same pieces of literature keep coming up, in
relation to your topic. This probably indicates that your search is well focused and that you are
finding the most relevant pieces.
The e-library provides a great opportunity to obtain academic literature that would normally be
difficult or expensive to access, so make the most of it!
2.3.3
Internet Searching
The internet provides a useful means of accessing various kinds of literature. Many journal articles
can be found online and sometimes book chapters, or even whole books, are available to download.
Remember, however, that the range of good quality academic articles that you are likely to be able
to freely access on the Internet is very small in comparison to those that you will be able to access
through the University’s e-library. You should therefore be extremely wary of relying too heavily on
the Internet. A literature review that is based mainly on Internet sources will almost certainly fail to
include some of the most relevant and important pieces of literature.
Here is a list of some Internet resources that you may find useful:
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
31
Box 2.6 - Useful Internet Resources for International Development
General Development Resources
British Library for Development Studies (BLDS) https://eldis.org/document/A26076
Development Gateway http://www.developmentgateway.org
Development Studies Association http://www.devstud.org.uk
Global Development Network http://www.gdn.int/en
Global Development Research Centre http://www.gdrc.org/index.html
Global Policy Forum http://www.globalpolicy.org
RROJAS Development Studies Database http://www.rrojasdatabank.org
Topic-focused Resources
Chronic Poverty Research Centre http://www.chronicpoverty.org
Comparative Research Programme on Poverty http://www.crop.org
Governance and Social Development Resource Centre http://www.gsdrc.org
International Food Policy Research Institute http://www.ifpri.org
International Institute for Environment and Development http://www.iied.org
Microfinance Gateway http://www.microfinancegateway.org/
One World (Civil Society Network) http://www.oneworld.net
Research Institutions
European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM) http://www.ecdpm.org
Institute of Development Studies http://www.ids.ac.uk
International Development Research Centre http://www.idrc.ca
Overseas Development Institute http://www.odi.org.uk
UN Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) http://www.unrisd.org
World Institute for Development Economics Research http://www.wider.unu.edu/
Donor Agencies and International Organisations
Asian Development Bank (ADB) http://www.adb.org
African Development Bank (AfDB) http://www.afdb.org
Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) http://www.iadb.org
International Crisis Group (conflict information) https://www.crisisgroup.org/
International Labour Organisation (ILO) http://www.ilo.org
International Monetary fund http://www.imf.org
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) http://www.oecd.org
UK Department for International Development (DFID) http://www.dfid.gov.uk
UNAIDS (Joint UN programme on HIV/AIDS) http://www.unaids.org
UN Development Programme (UNDP) http://www.undp.org
UN Environment Programme (UNEP) http://www.unep.org
UN Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) http://www.unhabitat.org/
UNICEF (UN fund for children) http://www.unicef.org
UNIFEM (UN fund for women) http://www.unifem.org
US Agency for International Development (USAID) https://www.usaid.gov/
World Health Organisation https://www.who.int/
World Bank http://www.worldbank.org
In addition to these resources, the Institute of Development Studies in Sussex have produced a
useful topic-indexed guide to internet resources, entitled ‘A Good Place to Start’, which can be
downloaded at http://www.ids.ac.uk/files/2166_-_Good_Place_to_Start_Low_ResV16.pdf
2.3.4
Snowball Searching
Having identified some of the articles or books that are most relevant to your chosen topic, it is
almost certain that you will be able to find further useful literature by simply scrutinising the
literature that you already have. There are various ways of doing this:
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
32
Searching Reference Lists
A quick look down the reference lists of key articles and books will almost certainly lead you to
further relevant literature.
Author Searching
Author searches may reveal further useful books or articles written by the authors of literature that
you have already found. Some authors have websites that list their publications.
Journal Contents
If your search has located several relevant articles published in certain journals, it may be fruitful to
search through the contents pages of recent issues of these journals.
2.3.5
Searching for Grey Literature
Searching for literature of this type perhaps requires the most imagination. The Internet is an
obvious starting point. Relevant articles, reports, administrative records and surveys can often be
found on-line, usually by scrutinising the websites of the organisations that have produced them.
However, there may well be useful documents that have never found their way to the Internet, and
can only be obtained by making direct contact with relevant organisations. If your research focuses
on a particular organisation that you work within, or where you have some contacts, then you may
be able to access a wealth of useful grey literature. It is essential, however, to ensure that permission
is granted by the appropriate person (not necessarily your contact!) for the use of unpublished
materials, particularly where sensitive information is contained.
2.3.6
How much time should I devote to literature searching?
It is important to spend enough time on the literature search to ensure that you are really familiar
with your topic, aware of the key authors, and have captured the most important and useful pieces
of literature available. Given the wealth of information that is available on most topics, however, this
may seem like a daunting task. The following excerpt may help you to understand the boundaries of
the search process and ensure that it does not become an all-consuming process:
Box 2.7 - Reading: ‘Common Pitfall’
“It is perhaps wise to always remember that the ultimate purpose of
searching for the very latest information is the production of an academic
dissertation or a journal article. The literature search is not an end in itself!
You do not receive your research degree, or get your article published on
the basis of a sophisticated literature search, although that will no doubt
help a good deal. With this enormous expansion in the access to
information electronically, it is easy to be swept away into devoting far too
much time to this. You will not gain any specific credit for the number of
electronic literature searches that you carry out; for the number of
potential citations which you find; for the number of possible quotations
that you save in your database; or the variety of different databases which
you consult. The sheer range of information available makes it seem very
attractive to keep carrying out more and more searches. However, it is
not necessarily profitable to acquire far more possible citations than you
really need. That will only make the selection process more complex.
When your dissertation is finally evaluated, the quality of the literature
review will be considered in the light of the citations included, not those
which have been excluded! It will be determined by the level of analysis,
the way complex ideas are integrated with the rest of the dissertation, and
the way in which the relevant literature is sub-divided and then
synthesized. When you are conducting your literature searches it would
be best to remain focused at all times on the final goal or target of these
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
33
searches. Remember what you are trying to produce, and do not get too
drawn into the actual search process.”
Source: Oliver (2012, pages 50-51)
In short, read with purpose and try not to get trapped within the search process! Another useful tip
is to always keep your research questions in mind when you are searching for literature. It is very
easy to get side-tracked into reading articles that seem very interesting but are not directly related
to your research questions. If this happens you need to either discard these articles, so that you do
not lose your focus, or alter your research questions so that they focus on an aspect of the topic
which is of more interest you. This latter choice may seem radical, but it is quite common for
research questions to change during the course of a study.
2.4
Selecting Literature for Inclusion
As you read, look out for key concepts and theories, and try to recognise how the authors define or
interpret them. Identify debates, or contentious issues, and try to get an idea as to how these
debates have changed over time. You should also consider where you position yourself within these
debates or theoretical perspectives. As you start to familiarise yourself with some of the most
important literature, you should be able to devise a structure for the literature review, keeping in
mind the main purposes of the review (as discussed in Section 2.1) and your research questions.
Then, as you continue to read, you can consider where and how each piece of information might fit
into your structure and how each piece might relate to your research questions.
As your reading expands, you will need to decide which individual pieces of literature to actually
include in your review and, for those pieces that you decide to include, how much weight to attach
to them (or how deeply to explore them). These decisions rest with you, as the researcher, but you
should be able to justify your choices and explain why each piece that you select is important and
relevant to your study. Oliver (2012) suggests taking into account the following factors:
Fitting with the structure
Your literature review should have a clear and logical structure to it, with each section of it
developing a theme or exploring a particular idea or concept. Further guidance on structuring your
literature review is given later in Section 2.8, but you should ensure that each piece of literature that
you select will easily fit into at least one section of the review. It is probably best, therefore, to plan
the structure before selecting the literature to fit with it.
Quality and relevance of arguments
It is very important that you make your own assessment of the quality or validity of arguments put
forward in a piece of literature, as well as their relevance to your own research, before deciding
whether to include the piece in your review. Try to do this as objectively as you can. Even
arguments that you strongly disagree with may be valid and relevant, and therefore worthy of
inclusion. In the case of journal articles, carefully reading the abstract should give you a clear idea of
what the article is about, and how relevant it is. You can usually access article abstracts on electronic
databases without having to actually retrieve the article itself. Having read the abstract, you will be
able to rule out some articles straight away. If you are not sure after reading the abstract, then you
will probably need to scan read the whole article in order to decide whether it merits inclusion.
Peer-review
The peer-review process, to which most published research is subject, provides an assurance that
published research has been checked for quality, errors and flaws, usually by at least two or three
other academics. Whilst this is no guarantee of quality, it does guarantee that certain quality checks
have at least been applied. It is also very likely that improvements will have been made to the original
submission, in response to peer-review feedback. Selecting peer-reviewed literature for your review
should help to raise confidence (your own, as well as that of the reader) that your review includes
good quality literature. This does not mean, of course, that you should not critically review the peerreviewed literature yourself, as with any other literature contained in your review.
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
34
Key authors
Key authors tend to be frequently cited. So, as you read widely in a particular field, you will start to
identify who the key authors are. When you identify a key author, it is worth familiarising yourself
with at least some of their work, and considering whether any should be included in your review.
Citation record
The citation record of a published article is a measure of the extent to which other writers have
found the article useful enough to cite in their own publications. Checking the number of times that
a particular article has been cited, therefore, may give some indication as to the status of a particular
article within the academic community.
Research design and methodology
It is useful to include research studies that are based on a similar research design and methodology
to that which you intend to use. This will provide precedent and help to justify the approach that
you intend to adopt, particularly if the research paper is concerned with a similar type of research
problem. Where design and methodological issues or dilemmas have been identified in the literature,
these may help to provide you with a starting point for reflecting on your own research design and
methodology. Another reason for including studies based on similar methodologies is that you may
find it easier to compare the findings of your own study to those of similarly constructed studies
rather than to those of studies based on completely different methodologies.
Writing style
Whilst published research papers are nearly always written in an academic style, the writing styles
adopted by authors of grey literature can vary enormously. For example, websites and reports
produced by organisations, such as NGOs, often use value-laden language, as they are attempting to
get a particular message, or point of view, across. Some pieces may use a lot of colloquial
terminology, particularly if they are aimed at connecting with a particular audience. You will need to
consider whether informality or ‘lack of objectivity’ are factors that should lead you to exclude
certain pieces from your review.
Recency
In general, it is usually better to include fairly recent pieces of literature (i.e. pieces written or
published within the last 5 to10 years) as these are more likely to take account of current or recent
developments in the field. However, there are exceptions. For example, if you were trying to build
up a historical picture of how thinking in a particular field has developed, you may need to include
pieces written in different eras. You should also bear in mind that there are often certain seminal
works in a particular field, the significance of which will warrant their inclusion even if they were
written a very long time ago.
The following reading and reflection exercise should help you to think further about how to plan and
organise your literature search:
Box 2.8 – Reading and Reflection Activity: Literature Maps
Meth, P., and Williams, G. (2006), ‘Literature Reviews and Bibliographic Searches’, in
Desai, V., and Potter, R. (eds), Doing Development Research Methods, London:
Sage, pp 209-221.
This book chapter introduces the idea of a ‘literature map’, which is a way of mapping
out the various kinds of literature that you will need to do a good literature review on a
particular topic. A worked example is provided, based on a study on urban violence in
Durban, South Africa. The chapter also touches on most of the other topics covered in
these notes and provides examples of good and bad literature reviews.
When you have read the chapter, have a go at drawing a literature map for your own
research topic.
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
35
2.5
Managing the Literature
It is important to set up a system for keeping track of your references and sources. This could be a
manual system, such as a card index, or a computerised record - in which case you should ensure
that back-up copies are always available. If you list references alphabetically, using the appropriate
reference style (‘Harvard’ for University of Birmingham), then you should be able to transfer your
list to the reference section at the end of your dissertation. You may also consider using a
referencing software package, such as ‘Endnote’, which will automatically record your references in
the format that you select, as well as providing space for your notes. (Also available – and possibly
more suitable for students on postgraduate taught programmes - is ‘RefWorks’, which is free to
download via our University’s intranet at
https://intranet.birmingham.ac.uk/as/libraryservices/icite/software/index.aspx.
However, these packages may lack flexibility, particularly when it comes to referencing unusual
pieces of grey literature.
It is important to make notes as you read. At the very least, note down a few comments
summarising each article, and perhaps highlighting the key passages, so that you can quickly recall
what the article was about without having to read the whole thing again! You should also make a
note of how your own thoughts develop with your reading, and where and how each piece fits into
the planned structure of your review. If you come across a useful quotation you could copy it into
your notes along with the page number and the reason that you found it useful. This way you will be
able to quickly retrieve it and link it to the relevant arguments that you are making, when it comes
to writing up the literature review. It is very easy to forget about relevant articles and parts of books
that you have already found as the search process expands, or to forget why you thought that a
particular extract was important. Managing your literature carefully can save the frustrating loss of
valuable time in re-reading or trying to track down lost pieces of literature, or searching for more
literature that you do not actually need.
2.6
Critically Reviewing the Literature
It is not sufficient to simply describe and summarise the literature in the field. You need to go
further and critically review the literature, in order to show that you are thinking about the topic,
and developing your understanding of the key issues, through your reading. In other words, you
need to do a ‘literature review’ rather than a ‘literature survey’. In the case of research papers, you
should look closely at the research design and methodology, to see whether there are any potential
flaws or limitations. If sampling is used, for example, has the sampling procedure been adequately
described? Do you feel that the sample is large enough and that the selection criteria are
appropriate? You could consider whether sufficient evidence has been presented to support the
study findings, and whether there are any possible alternative explanations for the study results that
have not been recognised by the author. In the case of discussion papers, you could consider how
well the arguments are presented, whether alternative arguments have been acknowledged and
whether there is sufficient evidence for the conclusions drawn.
Each piece of information that is included in the review should be critically reviewed, or assessed to
determine its strengths, weaknesses, limitations and relevance to your research questions. This will
enable you to assess the contribution that each piece makes to various debates within your topic
area, and the weight that they should be afforded within your literature review. The level of
attention that you give to each piece will largely depend on how central each piece is to the research
problem that you are investigating. Background pieces may only warrant a sentence or two in your
review, while the most relevant pieces may require a whole paragraph. Some pieces of literature
may appear very relevant and important at first sight, but less so on closer inspection. For example,
a recent research paper which has a very relevant context and addresses questions similar to your
own may turn out be based on a worryingly small sample, giving you less confidence in the results of
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
36
the study. Alternatively, a research study may be of excellent quality, but not relevant enough to the
particular questions that you are seeking to address.
Critical review may seem like a daunting task, especially when faced with published work that
appears to be beyond reproach. However, no piece of research is ‘perfect’ and even published
research may well contain obvious weaknesses, so nothing should be taken at face value. Similarly,
very few discussion papers will see every side of a particular argument, so there is usually scope for
suggesting alternative arguments or perspectives. Also, it should be remembered that critical review
is not just about ‘finding fault’. Recognising the quality and relevance of a particular work or study is
an important part of the critical review process.
Box 2.9 – Reflection Activity: Critical Review
Select one research report (contained within a book or journal article) that you are
considering for inclusion in your literature review. Read the article carefully (at least
twice) and then consider the following questions;
1. What is the main purpose of the study, and how does it differ from the purpose
of your own study?
2. What perspectives, philosophies, values or interests appear to have informed the
study?
3. What methodology has been used, and can you see any weaknesses or
limitations in the methodological approach adopted? If so, are these
acknowledged by the author?
4. What is the effect of the language used in the article?
5. Are the study findings justified by the evidence presented?
6. How well does the author interpret the study findings?
7. What is your overall impression of the report?
8. What will you do now with the report? If you are going to use it, how much
weight will you give it in your literature review?
Now write a short paragraph on the report. Start by briefly summarising the report and
putting it into context. Then go on to critically review the report, based on your
responses to the questions above.
2.7
Synthesising the Literature
As well as critically reviewing individual pieces of literature, it is necessary to synthesise the
literature as a whole. This means linking up the various ideas, perspectives and common themes that
emerge from different pieces of literature, so that your whole literature review is greater than the
sum of the parts. In other words, you are aiming to add value to your collection of literature by
identifying the common threads and discussing the debates that emerge when various pieces are
viewed together as a whole. This is what makes your review unique and original. For example, if
your research focuses on access to health care in Zambia, it may be that gender-based discrimination
is a theme that emerges from several of your literature pieces. This is a common theme that can be
discussed in your review. You should consider whether each author views this issue in the same
way, or whether they differ. Do they differ in terms of the importance they attach to gender-based
discrimination, for example, or do they differ in terms of the causes of gender-based discrimination
that they identify? If your literature includes research papers, you should be able to link together
those based on similar methodologies, and then draws comparisons in terms of how those
methodologies are applied.
In reality, of course, it will probably not be possible to link every piece of literature with each other,
but you should be able to spot links between most of your literature pieces and at least two or
three other pieces. As you start to group pieces together in this way, it should become easier to see
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
37
where the common themes are, where the debates are and where each piece fits into your overall
literature review structure.
Box 2.10 – Suggested Reading
Barrientos (2007) ‘Interrogating information through a literature study’. In Thomas, A.,
and Mohan, G. (eds) (2007), Research Skills for Policy and Development, London:
Sage.
Read Section 5.2 of Chapter Five (pages 120-129), which discusses the process of
critically reviewing and synthesising academic literature in the field of development.
Box 2.11 – Reflection Activity: Synthesising the Literature
Select three pieces of literature (such as journal articles or book chapters) that relate to
one particular aspect of your research topic.
Briefly summarise each piece, identifying the main issues, or themes, that emerge.
Write a paragraph discussing the similarities and differences between the three pieces
that you have selected. Finish the paragraph by drawing conclusions about how the three
articles taken together have added to your knowledge on the topic.
2.8
Writing up the Literature Review
It is usually tempting to begin the writing up process at an early stage, as you will then feel that you
are making progress with your dissertation. This is probably not a bad idea, but you should bear in
mind that your review will probably need to be fine-tuned, or even significantly changed, as your
study progresses. It may be, for example, that the relevance of certain pieces of literature only
becomes apparent when you start analysing primary data that you have collected, or that you
become aware of important new pieces of literature as your knowledge of the subject increases, or
as new developments occur in your field.
Writing the review essentially involves critically reviewing and synthesising the existing literature,
and then going on to draw some conclusions on what you have learnt from the literature and why
your research is important, in relation to the literature. Many students set aside a chapter in their
dissertation for this. Whilst this is a sensible approach, you should take care to ensure that the
review chapter is not disconnected from the rest of the dissertation. You will need to make
reference to the review at relevant points throughout your dissertation, from the introductory
chapter right through to the concluding chapter. A less common approach is to include shorter
literature review sections within several chapters. While this has the advantage of enabling you to
introduce and discuss particular pieces of literature at the most relevant point in the dissertation, it
may be harder to bring together the various strands of your literature review and draw overall
conclusions, in relation to your research questions, if you approach the task in this way.
Your review should be written in ‘essay style’, with a clear and logical structure. Here is a suggested
basic structure for a literature review chapter:
Introductory section
Here, you should provide the background and set the context for the review. Give a very brief
overview of the topic outlining the main arguments or debates, as well as any concepts or theories
that you will be examining through the review. Outline the structure of your review, which should
relate to the overview that you have provided and your research questions. It is also helpful to
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
38
outline the methods that have been used to collect literature for the review, and refer to any
limitations of the approaches that you used.
Findings and discussion
Here, you examine the literature in detail. The main body of the review should be divided into
sections (usually with sub-headings), each dealing with a particular theme, concept, perspective or
debate. If your study focuses on a number of research questions, it might work best to have each
section dealing with one research question. Another possible approach is to deal with the literature
in chronological order, showing how thinking around the topic has developed over time. However
you arrange the sections, they should follow a logical sequence, as if telling a story with your findings.
As you introduce each new piece of literature, put it into context and then provide some critical
analysis (see Section 2.6). The depth of your critical analysis will depend on how important and
relevant you consider the piece to be to the argument or theme that you are exploring. You should
also try to synthesise the literature (see Section 2.7) within each section, making comparisons
between various pieces and commenting on differences or similarities between them, and the
implications of these debates for your own research questions.
Conclusions
The concluding section should provide an overall summary of the literature that has been reviewed.
You should not introduce new pieces of literature at this stage. The aim is to view the body of
literature as a whole, drawing conclusions from your critical review process and the comparisons
that you have made, in order to draw your own insights. You should go on to discuss how these
insights relate to your research questions, and to identify areas in which your planned research
could make a contribution to existing knowledge in the field.
2.9
Avoiding Plagiarism
As a general rule, avoid copy and pasting from various sources into your literature review, as this
practice often leads to a high Turnitin score and concerns around possible plagiarism. Also avoid the
practice of changing just a few words in a sentence written by somebody else. It is far better to
quote directly (see below) or to present the argument or idea completely in your own words (in
which case you would just state the source and would not need to use quotation marks). See the
PGT Student Handbook (p. 105) for more information on what constitutes plagiarism.
2.10
Using References and Quotations
You need to reference each piece of literature that you refer to in your review, using the Harvard
system. This is very important, so care should be taken to ensure that your references are correct.
References should be stated within the first sentence to which they apply, and then referred to again
as necessary thereafter. Try to use original sources where possible, but make sure that any
secondary sources that you do use are cited as such. Also try to provide some context for the
references that you refer to, particularly when they relate to an empirical study. Box 2.12 below
gives examples of good and bad uses of a particular reference:
Box 2.12 - Good and Bad Uses of a Reference
Bad use of a reference:
“Smith argues that university students prefer lectures to tutorials”
Good use of the same reference:
“In a questionnaire survey of 2000 students in London, Smith (2006) identified
that 70 per cent of university students preferred …”
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
39
Or perhaps:
“Smith (2006) argues that from his own experience as a student in London,
there was a strong feeling among his peer group that lectures were preferable
to seminars”
Source: Adapted from Aveyard, 2007, pages 78-79
In the first example, the reference has not been put into context, so it is unclear what Smith’s
opinion is based on. In the following two examples, the context has been made explicit, so that it is
clear how Smith has arrived at his/her opinion. Where the opinion is based on some empirical
research, such as a questionnaire survey, it may be sensible to then critically review this piece of
research, commenting on its strengths and weaknesses. Having determined the context and strength
of Smith’s argument, it is then necessary to explain how this argument relates to the research topic,
and especially to your own research questions. For example, you could consider whether the
students in London, to whom Smith is referring, are likely to have differing perspectives to those
who are the subjects of your own research.
Sometimes it makes sense to make use of direct quotations, which express a point of view
particularly well. If you do this, be sure to make it clear that you are quoting directly, by using
quotation marks, and always provide a page reference where possible. It is important to select
quotations carefully and not to overuse them. If there are too many quotations, or they are too
long, they can easily overshadow your own arguments. Remember that your review will be judged
mainly on the quality of your own arguments, rather than your ability to quote other authors. If you
use a quotation, explain how it fits into your analysis and what particular point it helps to illustrate.
Dissertation Handbook Part 2: Doing the literature review
40
Part 3: Methodological Approaches
This part of the handbook focuses on the methods involved in carrying out a dissertation. It begins
by looking at various approaches to conducting a desk-based dissertation, and then goes on to cover
sampling techniques and both quantitative and qualitative methods of collecting and analysing primary
data. While these primary data collection methods will probably be of most value to those who are
planning to conduct field research, some of these methods may also be used in desk-based research
(see Box 3.2). It is also useful to have an understanding of basic field research methods when
critically reviewing primary studies that have been conducted by others.
As you read through the notes, consider the following questions:
Box 3.1 – Questions to think about as you read
1. Do you normally respond to questionnaires or surveys that you are asked to
participate in? If not, why not? What would make you more likely to participate?
2. To what extent do interviewees tell researchers what they think that they want
to hear? How can this risk be reduced?
3. How might your presence as a direct observer affect research subjects? What
kind of details might a direct observer miss?
4. Can you think of any ‘ethical dilemmas’ which may arise when conducting
research? If so, how would you address these?
3.1
Desk-based Dissertations
Desk-based dissertations tend to mainly utilise information that is already available (i.e. secondary
data), such as data found in books, journal articles and various types of grey literature. This does not
mean that your dissertation simply becomes an extended literature review. You would still start
with a literature review, exploring the important concepts and general issues in the wider literature
that relate to your research topic. You would then focus more narrowly on your chosen topic, in
order to address your research questions and hopefully to make a contribution to present
understanding on the topic. You would also still need a methodology chapter, which would normally
follow the literature review and explain your methodological approach to addressing the research
problem. There are various approaches to desk-based research that you might consider, some of
which are discussed in this section. Before looking at these approaches, I would like to address a
couple of common misconceptions that are often associated with desk-based dissertations:
Box 3.2 – Common misconceptions about desk-based research
1. Desk-based studied are inferior to field studies
Whilst your decision to conduct a desk-based study, rather than collecting
primary data in the field, may be influenced by resource constraints and
practicalities, this does not mean that your dissertation will be inferior! It
is the quality, consistency and relevance of the arguments developed that
determine the quality of the dissertation, rather than the particular approaches
adopted.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodology and writing up
41
2. Desk-based studies use only secondary data
While desk-based studies tend to rely mainly on secondary sources, there is no
reason why these cannot be supplemented with some forms primary data,
collected using remote methods.
3.1.1
Case Study Approach
Desk-based dissertations often adopt a case study approach (see Section 1.9.2), based around an indepth analysis of one or more particular cases. Your case study could be based purely on secondary
data, which would often include grey literature (see Section 2.2.3), or could also involve primary data
collection. For example, questionnaire surveys could be sent out by e-mail or interviews could be
conducted via Skype or Zoom. Another option would be simply to use telephone interviewing, as
discussed below:
Box 3.3 – Telephone Interviewing
Telephone interviewing is not an easy task, since the interviewer is usually faced with the initial
challenge of establishing rapport with someone that they have not met in person, and who may
be very busy, or who may not be at all interested in contributing to the research study. Here are
a few tips:

Try to arrange a convenient time in advance for conducting the interview, so that the
respondent is less likely to be rushed or distracted when answering your questions.

Prepare a very brief summary of your study in advance of the call and make sure that
you have any necessary documents close at hand.

Try to project warmth and friendliness over the telephone, through your tone of voice
and the words that you use. Use voice cues to compensate for lack of visual contact.
Phrases such as ‘I see’, ‘could you expand on that a little?’ or ‘would you like to think
about that for a moment?’ can help to reassure the respondent.

Try not to talk too much! Listen sensitively and allow the respondent time to put their
views across (remembering to take notes while you are listening).

Sum up important points from time to time
Despite the challenges, telephone interviewing can be an effective and relatively inexpensive
means of conducting in-depth interviews, particularly if the other party is prepared for the call
and interested in your study. This method can also be used effectively for gaining answers to very
simple and direct questions from a sample of respondents. For example, if you were investigating
the availability of a particular type of immunisation within a particular region, you could call a
number of hospitals and clinics within the region to simply ask whether they are currently
offering the immunisation.
Having presented the findings of your case study (or case studies), you would then try to link these
findings to the wider literature, as presented in your literature review. This process of linking the
case study findings to the wider body of literature is crucial to showing how your study contributes
to what is already known about the topic, and doing this well will help to ensure that your
dissertation is coherent as a whole.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
42
3.1.2
Systematic Review
A systematic review can been defined as
“a literature review that is designed to locate, appraise and synthesise the best available evidence
relating to a specific research question in order to provide informative and evidence-based
answers” (Boland et al. 2017, p. 2)
This may sound just like a normal literature review, but a systematic review differs from a traditional
literature review in that it tends to be more narrowly focused around a specific research question,
rather than broadly reviewing the topic area. Another key difference is that the processes of
identifying, selecting and analysing data for a systematic review are often much more rigorous than in
a traditional literature review, and should always be transparent. This means that there should be
clearly defined criteria for the inclusion and exclusion of data, with the aim of covering all the
available data that meets the criteria as comprehensively as possible, and a clearly defined process
for analysing the data. The data to be included in a systematic review will often (although not always)
be of a single type, such as empirical studies, news reports, policy documents or administrative
records. This again contrasts with the traditional literature review which will usually include various
types of data, as discussed in Part Two.
One of our former students (Katie Guest, 2019) based her dissertation on a systematic review of
policy documents on disaster risk reduction produced by governments and development agencies in
the ASEAN region, with the aim of examining the extent to which these policies had become more
disability-inclusive since the adoption of the 2015 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.
The literature review provided a broad overview of the topic, exploring the concept of disability
itself, the impact of natural disasters on disabled people and relevant international frameworks,
including the Sendai Framework. This was followed by a methodology chapter, in which the reasons
for conducting a systematic review were explained, and the search strategy, inclusion criteria and
analytical approach were all clearly set out. One obvious inclusion criterion, for example, was that
policy documents must have been published from 2015 onwards. The systematic review findings and
analysis then followed. This excellent dissertation is available on Canvas.
3.1.3
Archival Research
One interesting approach, which could potentially be used as the basis of a systematic review, is to
make use of a data archive. The following boxed text provides detailed guidance on how to go about
conducting archival research.
Box 3.4: Archival Research
Archival research involves accessing primary sources – usually in the form of documents or
artefacts such as photos – that are held in a repository. While often neglected as a source of
data in development studies, archives are potentially a very valuable resource with which to
understand why particular policy decisions were taken or to understand the historical context of
development projects, for instance (Jennings, 2006).
A number of different organisations operate their own archives; others deposit material in
shared repositories. The types of archive most relevant to development studies scholars are
likely to be official government archives. These typically include papers relating to policy-making,
such as the minutes of cabinet meetings and correspondence between government ministers and
civil servants. There are also archives of material from religious, corporate, and third-sector
organisations that might be relevant, depending on your area of interest (Hammett et al., 2015, p.
198). Many universities own archives documenting their own histories, but also sometimes
containing material from other organisations or individuals. Newspaper archives can also be a
very useful source of information about events as they were documented in pre-internet media.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
43
Access arrangements will vary according to the archive you want to conduct research in. Larger
archives are often available to visit without booking, whereas smaller corporate or personal
archives will usually require pre-booking. Access to smaller archives may be restricted, unlike
official archives where anyone who registers can access material. At most archives, you will be
required to register when attending for the first time and will be issued with an identity card.
Sometimes this registration process will need to be started online before you attend in person,
and often you will be required to provide proof of your identity and address. Once registered,
you will be able to search the archive catalogue and place requests for the material that you wish
to consult. Individual documents are typically bundled into larger files that cover a particular
issue or time period. It is usually these files, rather than individual documents, that are
catalogued. Some archives make their catalogues available online (e.g.
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/), which is helpful as it means that you can make a list of
potentially relevant files in advance of your visit. In many archives, at least some of the materials
held will not have been catalogued; arrangements for accessing these non-catalogued items vary.
When you are issued with the files or artefacts that you have requested from the catalogue, you
will be able to consult them in a designated reading room. You will be required to comply with
certain rules that are put in place to preserve the items. Typically, these include not taking pens,
food or drinks with you into the reading room. Some archives will have scanning equipment that
you can use to make copies of documents (it is a good idea to take a high-capacity USB stick
with you), but many people use their own cameras to do this. There are several useful mobile
phone apps that can help you to create scans using your phone’s camera, which recognise text,
making it easier to work with the documents later. This whole process can be quite timeconsuming, so it is worth factoring in more time than you might initially anticipate having to
spend in the archive. Once you have collected and copied all the material you want, you will then
likely need to spend time organising and coding it back at your computer before you can begin
your analysis.
It is important to remember that archives rarely contain complete records of all potentially
relevant documents from the past. Government documents are usually released to the public
through national archives after a specified time period (this was previously 30 years in the UK
and is being transitioned to 20 years), although particularly sensitive material is sometimes
redacted or held back for longer or indefinitely. Even when released, however, for cost and
other reasons, the material included in the archive is almost always a small selection of all the
papers and correspondence pertaining to a particular issue. Moreover, material in an official
archive will inevitably present the view of the government that was in power at the time (albeit
perhaps also documenting dissenting views within government), much more thoroughly than the
views of other societal actors. It is not unheard of for governments to deliberate destroy
archived materials (McLennan and Prinsen, 2014, p. 87). It is worth remembering this when you
make use of archival material, which offers valuable but not necessarily complete insights into the
context of historical events and policies.
Within the UK, the main archive that is likely to be of interest to IDD students is the National
Archives (TNA) at Kew in London, but there are also smaller archives that are potentially
valuable. The University of Birmingham’s Cadbury Research Library, located in the basement of
the Muirhead Tower, for instance, is home to the archives of Cadbury Brothers Limited, the
Church Missionary Society, the YMCA and Save the Children, and the papers of former British
foreign secretary and prime minister Anthony Eden, amongst many other collections. Further
afield, you will find national government archives in most capital cities across the world (see
Jennings, 2006, for some examples).
Archives are increasingly making material from their collections available digitally on their
websites, although the cost and time required mean that only a small proportion of their total
holdings are usually available in this format. There are also several databases of digitised archival
material accessible via the university’s library catalogue: check out the ProQuest, Nexis and Gale
databases, for instance. Some newer historically valuable material was created in digital format, of
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
44
course, and a number of online archives collect and preserve this material, such as the Internet
Archive.
While archival research does not involve interacting with living people in the same way as, for
example, ethnography or interviewing does, this does not mean that it is free from the need to
make ethical considerations. An obvious ethical (and often legal) obligation on researchers is to
take care not to damage any archival documents, so as to ensure that they remain available for
future researchers to use (Jennings, 2006, pp. 248-9). Beyond this, documents available in
archives may reveal things about people who are still living, and even where material relates to
people who are no longer alive, making insights from the archives public through research can
still pose ethical dilemmas (see, for instance, Subotić, 2020).
The resources listed below should help you understand how you might go about using archival
research for your dissertation. For a useful list of examples of the types of research that
development studies scholars have conducted using archives, see Hammett et al. (2015, p. 199).
Hammett, D., Twyman, C. and Graham, M. (2015) Research and Fieldwork in Development,
London: Routledge.
Jennings, M. (2006) ‘Using archives’, in Desai, V. and Potter, R. (eds.) Doing Development Research,
London: Sage, pp. 241-50.
McLennan, S. and Prinsen, G. (2014) ‘Something old, something new: Research using archives,
texts and virtual data’, in Scheyvens, R. (eds.) Development Fieldwork: A Practical Guide, London:
Sage, pp. 81-100.
Subotić, J. (2020) ‘Ethics of archival research on political violence’, Journal of Peace Research,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343319898735.
Laurence Cooley, IDD
3.1.4
Social Media Research
Social media can provide a rich source of data that is increasingly relevant and influential in the
modern world. The boxed text below explains how social media can be used as the basis of a
dissertation:
Box 3.5: Social Media Research
“Social media platforms generate a vast amount of data on a daily basis on a variety of topics
and consequently represent a key source of information for anyone seeking to study
21st century society.” (Wasim Ahmed, 2019)
Social media research methods offer an opportunity to access significant amounts of data for
scholarly analysis (McCay and Quan-Haase 2017). Social media websites provide a platform for
individuals to proactively engage in world events via online self-expression (Ronsen 2012), whilst
giving researchers the opportunity to engage in bottom-up methodologies without the time
pressures incurred in traditional research tools, like focus groups or interviews (Jarvis and Lister
2016). However, they need to be applied like any other research methods. In other words, they
need to be integrated within a specific research design which guides the choice of method of data
collection, research instruments, method of sampling and analysis and so on.
Social media research methods can be used in different ways. Some studies are designed to
examine social media users' behaviours, habits, or experiences with social media. They may
include, for instance, observing users’ interactions on social media, but also interviewing,
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
45
conducting focus groups and surveys with social media users. Some examples of interview or
focus group research about social media use include: interviews with social media users regarding
experiences with public mourning on Facebook (Brubaker, Hayes and Dourish, 2013); interviews
with American Red Cross employees on using social media to communicate with key publics
(Briones, Kuch, Liu, & Jin, 2011); or interviews and focus group with women to explore gender
stereotypes on Facebook (Bailey, Steeves, Burkell, & Regan, 2013).
Other studies are grounded within a particular subject or field of study to examine social media
as it relates to a variety of topics (e.g., adolescent wellbeing, healthcare professionals, natural
disasters). These tend to include analysis of the content of the posts created by users in all
formats (text, video, images). Some examples of analysis of content of social media posts are:
qualitative analysis of the content of Twitter posts submitted by teenage students about the role
of Twitter in the teaching and learning process (Cohen and Duchan, 2012); content analysis
study of user-created videos about Islam on YouTube (Mosemghvdlishvili and Jansz, 2012); or
influenza coverage on social media (Lehmann, Ruiter and Kok, 2013).
In terms of collecting social media data, there are a number of software packages that can be
used for a research project (see Table 3.6 below). There are also other resources worth
consulting, such as: the Digital Methods Initiatives list of tools; the Ryerson University’s list of
tools from its Social Media Lab; and a further review of 100 social media tools was recently
published by SAGE Ocean.
Social media data can thus be retrieved from a vast variety of websites and can, as well, be
analysed according to a variety of methods of data analysis. For instance, content analysis can be
used for systematically labelling text, audio, and/or visual communication from social media, and
can provide a numerical output; thematic analysis can help, through a rigorous process, to locate
patterns within data through data familiarisation, coding, and developing and revising themes; and
social network analysis can be used to measure and map the relationships between individuals,
organisations, Web Pages, and information and/or knowledge entities.
A final important issue to consider regarding social media research methods is ethics. There are
ethical implications to consider when using social media data. For example, someone tweeting
during an emergency may not necessarily realise that their tweet may be being collected and
analysed, either to help co-ordinate relief activities, or to be reported in a research article.
Therefore, it is important for those undertaking social media research to critically reflect on the
possible implications of a research project involving social media data to the persons involved in
creating or being mentioned in such content.
One of the main debates regarding the ethics of social media research pertains the question: are
social media spaces public or private? The public and private distinctions are important when
researching online spaces as in addition to ethical implications the public may react negatively if
they feel that researchers are intruding on their privacy. Certain social media platforms are seen
as inherently private spaces – Facebook – whereas others are seen as public spaces for online
communication to take place – Twitter. While most content that is shared on Twitter is publicly
accessible via the Twitter API and/or via data resellers, the majority of Facebook is considered
private and that data from Facebook are normally only made available at an aggregate level.
Twitter profiles and tweets are, by default, set to public visibility and, consequently, Twitter
could be considered more of a public space compared to Facebook. However, the extent to
which users of Twitter are aware of this is debatable.
Another important debate is related to obtaining informed consent when conducting social
media research. This may be not always possible within social media research as researchers may
be working with very large datasets, which makes it impracticable to obtain informed consent
from all users or when approached for informed consent, social media users may not reply or
may no longer be maintaining their account. However, if possible, researchers should ask for
informed consent. Some recommended steps to do this are:
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
46
When recruiting participants:




Approach possible participants over the platform being used in the research (rather than
email).
Be transparent in recruitment materials (e.g. Include your affiliation, research aims).
Explicitly state the security and privacy terms in recruitment materials of the platform
the research will involve.
Explain where you obtained participants’ contact details.
When collecting data:



Recognise differing views on what is legally permitted to be collected compared to what
some may consider their intellectual property.
Take time to consider the openness of a platform you are using and whether
steps can be taken to gain trust of users.
Acknowledge the different ways users engage online, how they create, share and
observe, and how your data may include a specific view or type of user.
When reporting results:





Test the traceability of a post and take responsible steps (e.g., anonymisation).
Options include paraphrasing instead of verbatim or using quote but no user name.
Where reasonable, seek informed consent to use verbatim quotes, images or video
such as through direct tweets.
Acknowledge limitations of the representativeness and validity of your findings.
Explicitly state the platform used.
Thus, researchers should always consider thoroughly possible issues around consent and should
reflect about them when writing-up their outputs.
Recommended readings:
Ahmed, W., Bath, P. A. and Demartini, G. (2018) Using Twitter as a Data Source: An Overview
of Ethical, Legal, and Methodological Challenges. In Woodfield, K. (ed.), The Ethics of Online
Research: Advances in Research Ethics and Integrity. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited (pp. 79107).
Pila, E., Mond, J., Griffiths, S., Mitchison, D. and Murray, S. (2017) A thematic content analysis of
cheatmeal images on social media: Characterizing an emerging dietary trend, International Journal
of Eating Disorders, 50: 698-706. [image analysis]
Rodham, K., and Gavin, J. (2006) The Ethics of Using the Internet to Collect Qualitative Research
Data, Research Ethics Review, 2: 92–97.
Raquel da Silva, IDD
Box 3.6 below provides a list of software packages, compiled by Raquel, which may be useful as a
source of data for social media research:
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
47
Box 3.6: Overview of Tools for Retrieving Social Media Data
Tool
OS
Download and/or access from
Platforms*
Audiense
Webbased
https://audiense.com/
Twitter
Brand24
Webbased
https://brand24.com/features/#4
Twitter, Facebook,
Instagram, Blogs,
Forums, Videp
Brandwatch
Webbased
https://www.brandwatch.com/
Twitter, Facebook,
YouTube, Instagram,
Sina Weibo, VK, QQ,
Google+, Pinterest,
Online blogs
Chorus
(free)
Windows
(Desktop
advisable)
http://chorusanalytics.co.uk/chorus/request_d
ownload.php
Twitter
COSMOS
Project
(free)
Windows
& MAC
OS X
http://socialdatalab.net/software
Twitter
Echosec
Webbased
https://www.echosec.net
Twitter, Instagram,
Foursquare,
Panoramio, AIS
Shipping, Sina Weibo,
Flickr, YouTube, VK
Followtheha
shtag
Webbased
http://www.followthehashtag.com
Twitter
IBM
Bluemix
Webbased
https://www.ibm.com/cloudcomputing/bluemix
Twitter
Keyhole
Webbased
https://keyhole.co/
Twitter, Instagram,
Facebook
Mozdeh
(free)
Windows
(Desktop
advisable)
http://mozdeh.wlv.ac.uk/installation.html
Twitter
Netlytic
Webbased
https://netlytic.org
Twitter, Facebook,
YouTube, RSS Feed
NodeXL
Windows
https://www.smrfoundation.org/nodexl/
Twitter, YouTube,
Flickr, Wikipedia
NVivo
Windows
and MAC
http://www.qsrinternational.com/product
Twitter, Ability to
import
Pulsar Social
Webbased
http://www.pulsarplatform.com
Twitter, Facebook
topic data, Online
blogs
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
48
Tool
OS
Download and/or access from
Platforms*
Social
Elephants
Webbased
https://socialelephants.com/en/
Twitter, Facebook,
Instagram, YouTube
Symplur
(Healthcare
focus)
Webbased
https://www.symplur.com/
Twitter
SocioViz
Webbased
http://socioviz.net
Twitter
Trendsmap
Webbased
https://www.trendsmap.com
Twitter
https://www.trackmyhashtag.com/
Twitter
Trackmyhas
htag
Twitonomy
Webbased
http://www.twitonomy.com
Twitter
Twitter
Arching
Google
Spreadsheet
(TAGS)
(free)
Webbased
https://tags.hawksey.info
Twitter
Visibrain
Webbased
http://www.visibrain.com
Twitter
Webometri
c Analyst
(free)
Windows
http://lexiurl.wlv.ac.uk
Twitter (with image
extraction capabilities),
YouTube, Flickr,
Mendeley, Other web
resources
An example of an outstanding past dissertation, based on social media, can be found on Canvas. This
dissertation, written by Quinn Vollmers (2019), explored the role of social media in fuelling antiimmigrant sentiment in the US, using content analysis to analyse Donald Trump’s use of the Twitter
platform.
3.1.5
Discourse Analysis
The term ‘discourse analysis’ encompasses a range of approaches to critically analysing written and
spoken language, within a social context. Box 3.7 below outlines three criteria as to what might
qualify as critical discourse analysis:
Box 3.7 – Critical Discourse Analysis: What Counts

It is not just analysis of discourse (or more concretely texts), it is part of some form of
systematic transdisciplinary analysis of relations between discourse and other elements
of the social process
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
49

It is not just general commentary on discourse, it includes some form of systematic
analysis of texts.

It is not just descriptive, it is also normative. It addresses social wrongs in their discursive
aspects and possible ways of righting or mitigating them.
Source: Fairclough, N. (2013, p. 10)
If you are considering using discourse analysis in your dissertation then I would recommend the
following E-book, which is available from the University E-library (and also from the resource list on
Canvas):
Johnstone, B. (2018) Discourse Analysis. Third Edition. Chichester: Wiley & Sons.
3.2
Sampling Methods
Since it is rarely feasible to collect empirical data from the entire population of research subjects
that we are interested in (as in a census, for instance), it is nearly always necessary to work with a
representative sample, or one that is as representative as possible. If you are collecting your own
primary data, you should be explicit about the sampling strategies that you have adopted and
acknowledge any limitations, because sampling decisions can have a significant impact on your
research findings. Similarly, if using secondary data, you should carefully consider the sampling
methods adopted by those who have collected the data, so that you can make your own judgements
on the validity or reliability of the data that you are referring to. The two basic sampling methods
are random and purposive (or non-random) sampling.
3.2.1
Random Sampling
In random sampling (sometimes known as ‘probability sampling’) “each member or item of the
population has an equal or known chance of being selected” (Somekh & Lewin, 2005, p. 216). There
are various types of random sampling:
Pure random sampling
This is the simplest method of random sampling, in which each member of the target population has
an equal chance of selection. However, in order to conduct a pure random sample, it would be
necessary for every member of the target population to have an opportunity to be selected. Since
researchers in the field of international development are often conducting research within large
communities, or even whole countries, this may be difficult to facilitate! Even if your target
population is quite small, it may be difficult to conduct a pure random sample. For example, if you
were conducting research among street children in an Indian city, it could be extremely difficult to
obtain reliable information on who the street children are and how to reach them.
Systematic sampling
Systematic sampling is similar to pure random sampling, in that each member of the target
population must be known about. Potential research subjects are then listed, or arranged in some
random (or non-ordered) way, and research subjects are selected at regular intervals. For example,
if you were conducting research among the whole population of a small African village, you could
walk around the entire village selecting every 10th dwelling place.
Stratified sampling
This method involves dividing the target population into subgroups, according to one or more
particular characteristic (such as gender, age, or geographical location). You then select an equal
percentage of research subjects from each subgroup, using either pure or systematic sampling, in
order to make up your sample. This helps to ensure that the characteristics according to which you
have divided the target population are evenly distributed within your sample. For example, if you
want to ensure that the ratio between men and women in your sample is the same as that within the
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
50
overall population of interest, you would divide the overall population into two groups (men and
women), and then select, say, 2% of the total number of people in each group, in order to make up
your sample.
Cluster sampling
This method involves identifying clusters from the overall population and then selecting your sample
from within the cluster, using pure, systematic or strategic sampling. For example, if you were
conducting research on the health of diamond miners in Sierra Leone, you could randomly select
three diamond mines (the clusters), and then select an equal number of respondents from each
mine, using either pure or systematic sampling. Alternatively, you could take account of the relative
size of each of the mines by using stratified sampling. If, say, one of the diamond mines was twice the
size of other two, you would select twice as many respondents from the larger mine as from each of
the other two.
3.2.2
Purposive Sampling
This is by far the most common approach among IDD students. In purposive sampling (or nonprobability sampling), researchers will specifically target a particular group within the population of
interest. In other words, the sample is not randomly selected. Purposive methods are commonly
used in smaller research projects, when time or resources are limited, or when an in-depth study of
a relatively small sample group is required (as in case study design). The group may be selected
simply because it is a convenient one to access (a group of employees within the organisation in
which you work, for example). Alternatively, groups might be made up of people that possess a
particular characteristic, or combination of characteristics. For example, you might want to select a
group of people that have completed a particular training course, in order to examine the impact of
the training on their future careers. Two common types of purposive sampling are strategic sampling
and snowball sampling:

Strategic sampling
This involves selecting those who you believe will provide the most useful information, in
terms of addressing your research questions. For example, if you were conducting research
into social conditions within a community of Native Indians in North America, you might
decide to select local community leaders, social workers and NGO staff, because these
contacts may have more information about the overall situation than you would be able to
obtain from a random sample of community members.

Snowball sampling
This involves selecting a small number of respondents from your overall population, and
then asking these respondents to identify others with similar characteristics. For example, if
you were conducting research amongst disabled job-seekers in Nairobi, you might be able to
identify some through an agency that is supporting them. You could then ask the job-seekers
to identify other disabled job seekers, or, less directly, ask agency staff to identify other
agencies that are supporting disabled job-seekers.
Whilst purposive sampling may be the most practicable or appropriate way of going about selecting
a sample, it should be recognised that there is usually a greater chance of bias within a purposive
sample than within a random sample. This will have a knock-on effect on the generalisability of your
findings, which needs to be acknowledged.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
51
Box 3.8 - Reflection Activity: Sampling
Background:
Suppose that you are carrying out a qualitative study, focusing on a proposed NGO
livelihoods project in two Indian villages, which are close to each other and roughly the
same size. The project is designed to create employment and training opportunities for
the poorest members of these rural communities. The NGO is considering ways of
involving members of the two communities in the setting up and implementation of the
project, including identifying potential beneficiaries and helping to manage project funds.
You are interested in examining attitudes towards community participation, within these
districts. You plan to interview a wide range of people that may have an interest in the
project, in order to gather data.
Task:
Since it will not be possible to interview everyone that might have an interest in the
proposed project, you need to select a representative sample.
Questions to Consider:
1. Who do you think should be included in the sample?
2. How large would your sample need to be, in order to produce meaningful
findings?
3. What sampling strategy would you choose?
4. What considerations have influenced your choice of sampling strategy?
3.3
Quantitative Research Methods
Quantitative research methods are usually associated with positivist research (see Part 1, Section
1.8.1) where precise data is required in order to test hypotheses and answer research questions
objectively. Largely due to this epistemological background, there are four key features that tend to
characterise quantitative research:

Measurement
To be able to test hypotheses or answer research questions, the quantitative researcher is
expected to operationalise the main concepts into measurable variables and to identify
specific indicators which can be used to measure them. By doing so, it becomes possible to
quantify the variables and to identify relationships between them.

Causality
Quantitative research usually aims to identify and measure causal relationships between the
independent and dependent variables. Thus, quantitative research is often judged by the
extent to which causal inferences are seen to be valid. Experimental research designs,
specifically aimed at identifying causal relationships, are often favoured by quantitative
researchers for this reason.

Generalisation
Quantitative research usually aims to produce findings which can be generalised beyond the
confines of the particular context in which the research was conducted. In order to achieve
this, much attention is paid to the question of how to select a representative sample, and
random sampling methods are usually favoured.

Replication
Quantitative researchers are usually very explicit and detailed about their methods, so that
others can replicate their research within a different context, or using a different sample.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
52
This helps to demonstrate that the research is objective, and not overly biased by the
researcher’s characteristics, expectations, beliefs or values. This is a particularly important
consideration for those conducting research from a positivist standpoint.
3.3.1
Collecting Quantitative Data
Whilst quantitative data can be collected in various ways, the most common way is the
questionnaire survey, which is usually distributed to a representative sample of individual
respondents from the population of interest. Questionnaire surveys may be conducted by telephone,
sent through the post (or e-mail) or distributed in person. There are also on-line survey platforms,
providing a basic questionnaire survey format which can be customised by the researcher. One such
platform is Qualtrics, which you can access using the University’s licence (see
https://universityofbirmingham.servicenow.com/itportal?id=uob_kb_article&sysparm_article=KB13423&sys_kb_id=9a6cc922db1ee3443c6
6f3561d96192f&spa=1 ). Surveys should be conducted in a consistent way. In other words, each
respondent should be asked exactly the same questions and in the same manner.
Another way of collecting quantitative data is through structured interviews. These are similar to
questionnaire surveys, except that the researcher actually asks the questions and documents the
responses. There is a greater risk of inconsistency in the way that structured interviews are
conducted, as compared to surveys, and this is a risk that should be acknowledged and minimised by
the researcher. Your choice between survey and structured interview may depend on various
factors, such as resource constraints, the individual characteristics of respondents and where they
are located. For example, if you are conducting research among a group of illiterate people, then a
survey may be meaningless to them.
The size of the sample for surveys and structured interviews will depend on various factors, such as
the time and resources that you have available and the purposes to which the findings will be put.
However, it is generally the case that, the larger the sample, the more reliable your findings are likely
to be.
Surveys and structured interviews are particularly well-suited to collecting factual information about
people, such as biographical information. They can also be used effectively for gathering data on
people’s attitudes or opinions. The starting point in designing a questionnaire or interview schedule
is to decide exactly what kind of information you wish to obtain. If the study goals are fairly broad, it
may be necessary to break down the information required. One way of doing this is to examine your
research questions or hypotheses in order to identify the key study variables, and then to identify
indicators for each of these variables. For example, if you are studying motivation among workers
within an organisation, a key study variable will be motivation levels. Possible indicators for this
variable could be the employee’s attendance record or willingness to perform extra duties.
The survey or interview should begin with an introduction, explaining to the respondent what the
study is about and how the information that they are giving will be used. The introduction may also
refer to relevant ethical issues, as discussed later in these notes. The questions themselves should be
clear, simple and unambiguous. In general, respondents are more likely to answer straightforward
questions that are relevant to them. You may also find that certain types of questions are less likely
to illicit a response. For example, questions which tax the memory of the respondent, or those that
seek sensitive or self-incrimination information.
Pre-testing the questionnaire, or conducting a trial interview, will often reveal problems. Whilst
there are no precise rules for the wording of survey or interview questions, here are some things
that you should try to avoid:




long and complex questions;
double-barrelled questions (for example, ‘can you tell me how you developed this strategy,
and why?’);
double negatives;
jargon or abbreviations;
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
53




words with a double meaning;
emotionally-loaded words;
culture-specific terms;
leading questions.
If you are planning to conduct a survey, it is a good idea to practice beforehand. The following
reflection activity is designed to enable you to have a go at this:
Box 3.9 - Reflection Activity: Designing a Questionnaire
Setting:
The setting is an informal settlement in an urban area, in which owners have built houses
of semi-permanent materials. The settlement is on publicly-owned land. Residents do not
have title, but are not under threat of eviction. Some of the buildings are occupied by
one household. Other buildings, where the owner-occupier lets out rooms, are occupied
by more than one household. The area includes both poor and extremely poor
households.
There is a piped water supply to shared standpipes where, at present, water is free.
However, the supply is insufficient for the population, so some residents continue to use
shallow wells. The local government wants to improve the situation, but is short of
finance and so wants to increase the proportion of costs recovered from residents.
A list of all the buildings in the area is available from a local leader, and the buildings have
house numbers on them that coincide with the numbers on the list, so this can be used
as a basis for the sample frame (or overall target population). Assume that a random
sample of the buildings can be drawn up and that you will need to administer a
questionnaire to every household within each building in the sample. The respondent
should ideally be the head of household (the person with primary responsibility for
decision-making and financial management). However, many people will be out of work,
so assume that the questionnaire may, in practice, be answered on their behalf by
another adult in the household.
Purpose of the Survey:
To ascertain and explain the sources of water used by residents in the area, their levels
of satisfaction with the existing supply, their views on whether improvements should
concentrate on improving public standpoints or introducing private house connections,
and their willingness to pay for any improvements.
Task:
Design a questionnaire of up to 20 questions and pilot it on two friends or colleagues of
yours.
Questions to Consider:
1. What information on the socio-economic characteristics of households did you
think it necessary to obtain (and why?).
2. Were any flaws in your design identified when testing the questionnaire? If so,
how did you address them?
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
54
3.3.2
Analysing Quantitative Data
Your data needs to be analysed and presented in a format which enables you to draw conclusions in
relation to your research questions. There are three basic steps involved:
Categorisation
In order to make sense of your data, the first step is to categorise it. You will probably need to
identify categories that relate to each of your research questions. For example, if you have asked a
question about the factors that may influence a respondent’s decision to attend a health centre for
HIV screening, the categories could be ‘influence of spouse or partner’, ‘influence of HIV awareness
campaigns’, ‘distance from health centre’ and so on.
Coding
Having decided on categories, the next step is to code responses to each questions, so that they fall
into at least one of the categories. Using the previous example, if a respondent stated that he or she
attended a clinic for HIV screening having seen a roadside billboard encouraging screening, then this
would be coded under the ‘influence of HIV awareness campaigns’ category.
Presentation
The way in which you present your data will depend very much on what you are trying to show
which, in turn, relates to your research questions or hypothesis. For example, if you are examining a
hypothesis containing two variables, you might use a table or graph to show how the variables relate
to each other.
Quantitative data is normally analysed by using statistical methods. For example, frequency
distributions may be used to show how the data is distributed; scatter plots can illustrate the
relationship between two variables; and bar charts or pie charts can be used to illustrate the relative
importance of various categories or values. If your aim is to produce valid causal inferences from
your data, then the methods that you will need to use may be quite sophisticated, and certainly
beyond the scope of these notes. You will probably need to attend a course or complete a module
on statistical methods, unless you already have the necessary skills.
There are various computer packages, such as SPSS, which are designed to assist with analysing
quantitative data. While these can save lots of time, by doing the calculations for you and producing
graphs and tables in seconds, they should be used with caution. It is important to understand how to
use the package and the statistical methods that the package is using, because your data will only be
analysed correctly if the data is entered correctly in the first place and the correct statistical
procedures are selected. You also need to be able to interpret the results correctly yourself. In
short, it is dangerous to use these packages without having a good understanding of statistical
methods yourself!
The following book chapter gives a good overview of quantitative methods (including some basic
statistical procedures) and how to use them, in the context of development studies:
Box 3.10 – Suggested Reading
Overton, J. and van Diermen, P. (2003) ‘Using Quantitative Techniques’. In Scheyvens, R. and
Storey, D. (eds) Development Fieldwork: A Practical Guide. London: Sage, pp. 37-46.
3.4
Qualitative Research Methods
Qualitative research methods are usually associated with the interpretive social science and critical
social science philosophies (see Part One). They generally aim to capture the subjective
understanding of research subjects. Perceptions, interpretations, meanings, values and the nature of
social relationships are all considered relevant and important, as is the context in which these occur.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
55
Qualitative researchers are also concerned with the research process, particularly the role of the
researcher and how the researcher relates to those being studied. The subjectivities of the
researcher, as well as those being studied, are all part of the process of conducting research. Thus,
the feelings, insights, experiences and impressions of the researcher are normally documented as
part of the research process.
Sometimes the choice between qualitative and quantitative research methods is portrayed as a
choice between depth and breadth, with qualitative researchers tending to prioritise depth over
breadth. Hence, they tend to probe deeper, asking searching questions and allowing respondents the
space to express themselves fully, so as to gain a deeper understanding of how research subjects
view the world and create their own realities. They also try to learn as much as possible about the
context in which research subjects create these realities. For example, if you were conducting a
qualitative study on the impact of an awareness raising program on Hansen’s Disease (leprosy), in
remote jungle communities within Amazonia, you would probably want to learn about local factors
that may influence the programme impact. These could include, for example, the local availability and
affordability of antibiotic drugs, the ease with which health workers can reach the communities, local
belief systems and community attitudes towards people with Hansen’s Disease.
Given the depth and contextual detail that qualitative researchers try to obtain, it follows that
making generalisations can be quite problematic. Many qualitative researchers will avoid making
generalisations altogether and will only make claims in relation to the particular context in which
their study was conducted. If you do try to generalise the findings from qualitative research, it is
important to be realistic and explicit about the limitations, particularly if you are working with a
relatively small sample.
3.4.1
Collecting Qualitative Data
Qualitative data tends to consist mainly of words and images, rather than numbers. This section will
examine some of the most common ways of collecting qualitative data.
Stakeholder Groups
‘Stakeholders’ are “people, groups or institutions with interests in a project or programme” (Laws et
al, 2005, p. 336). ‘Stakeholder groups’ are, logically, groups of people or institutions that have some
common interests in the project or programme, or in the particular topic that you are investigating.
It is useful to make a distinction between ‘primary stakeholders’ and ‘secondary stakeholders’.
Primary stakeholders are those who are directly involved in or affected by a programme or
project, such as project staff or beneficiaries. Secondary stakeholders may not be so directly
involved, but nevertheless have some interest in the outcomes of the project or programme. They
may be in favour of the initiative or opposed to it.
When collecting qualitative data, it is often useful to target respondents from a range of stakeholder
groups, in order to gain a wide range of perspectives on the particular project, programme or topic
that you are investigating. For example, while conducting research on barriers to the employment of
disabled people in Uganda, I collected data from disabled job-seekers, NGO staff working with
disabled job-seekers, disabled people in employment, employers and government representatives.
Respondents from each group were able to provide data that was influenced by their own particular
stakeholder group perspective on the topic. Employers, for example, tended to highlight the lack of
confidence and self-presentation skills of many disabled job-seekers when presenting themselves for
interview, whereas disabled job-seekers were more likely to highlight discriminatory recruitment
procedures. Government representatives, on the other hand, tended to highlight poor workplace
accessibility and the failure of employers to comply with legislation as the major barrier. Some
barriers, such as negative societal attitudes around disability in general, were highlighted across all
stakeholder groups. By ensuring that various stakeholder groups were represented in my sample, it
was possible to obtain a more rounded picture of the perceived barriers to employment, and to
ascertain which barriers were seen as most significant by each particular stakeholder group.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
56
Using Gatekeepers
If you are planning to conduct fieldwork, it is important to thinks about how you will gain access to
research participants. The use of ‘gatekeepers’, such as community leaders, local administrators or
NGO staff, has its advantages, particularly if you are conducting research in a country that you are
not familiar with. However, there are also potential drawbacks. If the gatekeepers are not fully
trusted, or even feared, then respondents may feel less at ease, especially if the gatekeepers insist on
being present during interviews. Another possible problem is that some gatekeepers may direct you
to ‘non-typical’ respondents. For example, imagine that you are investigating the effectiveness of a
micro-finance project designed to promote entrepreneurship among poor women in a rural district.
An obvious choice of gatekeeper might be the project manager. However, it is possible that the
project manager, anxious for the project to be viewed in a positive light, may direct you only to
those beneficiaries that have already successfully started new businesses. In other words, the
gatekeeper’s priorities may distort the representativeness of your sample, which is a ‘biasing’ factor
that you would need to acknowledge when writing up the findings.
When using gatekeepers, as with all other elements of the fieldwork process, it is important to have
some understanding of the local context. The following boxed text provides some advice on
accessing and working with gatekeepers within an authoritarian context, based on an IDD staff
member’s experience in the post-Soviet region.
Box 3.11: Access to Gatekeepers in an Authoritarian Country
Authoritarian governments share similar characteristics despite their geographical location.
Several key challenges are discussed below to draw to the attention of students planning to
collect primary data in closed contexts.
Gaining Access
The problem of gaining access to government officials and other key stakeholders represents a
fairly universal one. It is critically important to start fieldwork by identifying key gatekeepers.
Gatekeepers in authoritarian regimes may include senior officials and senior public sector
managers as well as less obvious individuals who have good networking connections such as
NGO leaders and civic activists.
For example, in the post-Soviet countries in order to access government officials and public
sector organisations, researchers have to seek official approval from senior managers, send
official letters well in advance with a request to provide permission for conducting interviews or
doing a survey. The affection for official documents still prevails among the government bodies
and public sector organisations in many authoritarian states which might not accept email as an
official document. There is no guarantee that an official letter would be reviewed and responded
to on time. Some letters can be reported to be ‘undelivered’, ‘lost’ in the midst of bureaucracy,
or on the desk of a civil servant who has no interest in addressing this request. Being pro-active
and persistent would be a useful strategy to tackle bureaucratic obstacles.
Collecting data
In the non-democratic context government officials and public sector managers are reluctant to
share their views openly and tend to talk within the ‘scripts’ of state propaganda. Researchers
might be perceived as ‘inspectors’ whose purpose is to conduct evaluation. Participants of
interviews and surveys might remain silent about what they consider negative and undesirable
information that would paint a negative picture of their country. Building trust between a
researchers and participants is an important stage in the data collection process.
For example, “relational interviews” could be used as a primary tool for generating data in
combination with other qualitative or quantitative methods to triangulate findings from different
sources. Relational interviewing is a method for generating data through interactions between
researcher and interviewee (Fujii, 2017). Fujii (2017) argues that an interviewer’s ability to
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
57
properly analyze the “data” rests in their reflections on the mutual acts unfolding during the
conversation: moments of silence, reverse questioning, abrupt refusals to talk about issues that
are then talked about, and other behavior.
Advantages and potential risks
In some cases IDD students decide to conduct fieldwork in the context of their home countries
which provides them with advantages as well as potential risks. They have an intimate knowledge
of the local context and internal dynamics of the politicized environment. Students can rely on
pre-existing network connections from their previous education, employment, residence which
help to find informal and formal gatekeepers and access the participants. Knowledge of native
language is very helpful in collecting and analysing data. However, in the non-democratic context
local scholars experience high safety risks as they remain in their home countries.
Summary
The rigid political environment of an authoritarian state dictates high dependence of the
researchers on the official gatekeepers. The process of getting access to the participants who
represent senior managers requires significant preparation, time, patience, sending out official
letters, and follow-up with numerous phone calls and emails.
Data (both quantitative and qualitative) are difficult to access and unreliable in a ‘closed context’
which can be addressed by a triangulation of methods to cross check the data from various
sources. Each qualitative or quantitative method which a student plans to apply requires careful
adaptation to the specific environment of non-democratic country. In an authoritarian context
ethical issues and safety concerns both for the participants and researchers are of particular
importance.
Careful research design equipped with local network connections, good understanding of
informal practices on how to navigate through the system, triangulation of methods, and safety
measures both for participants and researchers, have the potential to generate rich empirical
data bypassing numerous restrictions imposed by authoritarian governments.
Saltanat Janenova, IDD
References:
Fujii, L. A. (2017). Interviewing in social science research: A relational approach. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Janenova, S. (2019) The boundaries of research in an authoritarian state, International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 18(1), https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1609406919876469
Semi-structured Interviews
Semi-structured interviews are a very popular choice among qualitative researchers, as they provide
a workable compromise between structured and unstructured interviews. The danger of too much
structure is that topics tend to be imposed on respondents (Copestake et al, 2005), denying them
the freedom to talk about the issues that are most important and relevant to them. Unstructured
interviews, on the other hand, run the risk of wasting valuable research time discussing issues that
are totally unrelated to the project. The semi-structured interview allows the respondent space to
raise issues and topics that are most relevant to them, within a loose guiding framework, designed to
ensure that discussions remain within the overall scope of the research project. This framework
often takes the form of a checklist of topics or themes, rather than a list of questions.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
58
The semi-structured interview approach helps to ensure that the data collected is manageable and
mostly relevant, while retaining flexibility and openness, thus allowing respondents to guide (or at
least influence) the research agenda to some extent. In order to encourage respondents to feel at
ease and ‘open up’, it is important for the interviewer to build rapport and gain their trust. Here are
a few tips that might help:

Always dress appropriately and show respect for local customs and etiquette.

Try to ensure that the respondent is comfortable and relaxed in the interview setting. If
there is a lot of background noise, for example, see if it may be possible to find somewhere
quieter.

If using recording equipment, check that the respondent is happy with this. Be prepared to
revert to note-taking if the respondent has reservations.

Begin the interview by taking the time to introduce yourself and briefly explain the project,
so that the respondent is clear about the purpose of the interview and how the interview
findings will be used (beware, however, of inflating expectations by promising too much!).

Inform respondents that they have a right to anonymity and are free to withdraw from the
process at any stage.

At the end of the interview, allow time to summarise the key points that have been made by
the respondent, in order to ensure that you have understood them correctly.
The following boxed text describes some of the practical techniques that can be used when
conducting interviews within organisations:
Box 3.12: Reading: Interviewing in Organisations for Academic Research
These notes describe what I have learnt after nearly thirty years of interviewing people
around the world for academic research and consultancy work. They do not relate to
media interviewing or to interviewing for job selection. I have divided these views into
three sections – getting the interview started, the process of the interview itself and
drawing the interview to a close.
Getting the Interview Started
I begin by introducing myself and the organisation for which I work
It is surprising how often the interviewee does not know why I have come. This may be
because someone else arranged the interview (for example, a secretary, junior or senior
officer) and the interviewee has not been properly briefed, or has forgotten the briefing. I
try also, where possible, to find something in common with myself/my organisation and
the interviewee and/or their organisation (for example, someone that we both know, or a
common interest).
I always give the interviewee my business card.
I then explain the purpose of the interview and the research or consultancy.
Depending upon the circumstances, I will ‘tell all’ or not. In some circumstances, you
cannot reveal the full purpose of the interview and/or consultancy as this may negatively
affect the responsiveness of the interviewee. Clearly, there are ethical issues involved here
over the degree of transparency that you offer.
At this point, I place a one page sheet between us showing my name and organisation (to
avoid embarrassment if the interviewee forgets it immediately!) and a brief summary of the
research. The interviewee can then refer to it at will during the interview.
Any Questions?
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
59
Before I move into the substantive part of the interview, I ask the interviewee if they have
any questions relating to the consultancy and the interview itself. This aims to ‘clear the
air’ before we get down to business.
How long have we got?
I ‘negotiate’ the time available for the interview, seeking a balance between how much time
I think that I need, and how much time the interviewee is prepared to give me. There is
nothing worse than interviewing someone who is constantly looking at their watch or
fidgeting because they are in a hurry to terminate. Agreeing a time enables me to
restructure my questioning accordingly and provides a more relaxed atmosphere by
removing the embarrassment surrounding different perceptions of when and how the
interview should end. Don’t be afraid to tell the interviewee right at the beginning how
much time you would like.
Entering the pool at the shallow end.
I never begin an interview by diving in at the deep end with difficult and/or detailed
questioning. Instead, I start the substantive part of the interview by asking the interviewee
to briefly describe their job and previous career. This kills two birds with one stone. Firstly,
it starts the interview in a very ‘general’ and non-controversial way (what the Americans
call an ‘ice-breaker’). Secondly, the information on career and present job often provides
invaluable information about the structure of the organisation and the experience of the
interviewee, both of which can be closely related to the concerns of the research itself. Of
course, there is the danger that the interviewee will proceed to spend a long time telling
you everything about him or herself, and if this happens you may have to politely interrupt
them. To avoid this, emphasise that you want only a brief account.
The interview process
The interview as a normal conversation:
The key approach that I use when interviewing is to try to produce a relaxed and informal
atmosphere that simulates that of a normal conversation. This is because I have found that
people speak more freely and openly when they are both relaxed and with friends. Some
of the most interesting ideas and pieces of information about ‘the way the world works’
have come to me from people I have met in a social setting. I do not think that this is
coincidental. I think it is because in such an environment people are more relaxed, do not
feel threatened, are more trusting, and generally more willing to talk.
But, clearly, an interview, usually between two people who have never met before, and in
the formal setting of an office environment, cannot replicate a relaxed conversation
between friends. Nevertheless, there are ways in which you can ‘move in that direction’
as follows:

Try to shield the interviewee from the interruptions and formality of their office.
In my experience, it is rarely practical to interview someone outside their office,
but you can suggest that you both move to an adjoining meeting room (if available).
This also has the advantage that the work colleagues of the interviewee cannot
listen. But sometimes interviewees feel more relaxed in their own office, so don’t
press your suggestion to move elsewhere. At least, being in the office enables the
interviewee to quickly refer to documents if necessary.

Try to stimulate a relationship of ‘equality’ between yourself and the interviewee.
Neither be servile to a very senior official nor appear threatening to a very junior
official. Both may relish the opportunity to speak their mind about the subject of
your interview, but both are constrained by ‘what is expected of them’.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
60

Try not to spend too much time writing down notes in front of the interviewee,
which does slow down the interview. Be careful not to show (by your writing)
which aspects of their answers you think are most interesting. Some interviewers
prefer to use a tape-recorder to minimise note-taking, and so be able to replicate
‘normal conversation’, in which note-taking does not occur. But I think that the
disadvantages of tape-recording (by inhibiting the interviewee – this is especially
true of public administrators) outweigh the potential advantages.

Avoid aggressive questioning and avoid showing your disagreement or anger with
answers to your questions. This is because both will only encourage the
interviewee to ‘close up’ and become less forthcoming during the rest of the
interview.
A voyage of discovery:
For me, a good interview can be a mental voyage of discovery in which I learn a lot. An
interview can lead me into uncharted territory in the form of a completely new ‘angle’ on
a question that had never occurred to me before. But, to enable you to ‘travel the seas’,
you must ensure that the approach of questioning does not constrain you (in asking new
questions), and the interviewee (in introducing new aspects of the issue at hand). I do not
use a detailed list of questions to fire at the interviewee one after the other. Some people
feel more confident with this approach but it is not for me. Sometimes, however, an
interviewee will demand a list of questions in advance, often as a condition for granting the
interview. In this case, you have to follow this format.
My preferred approach is different. I identify three of the broad ‘themes’ for the interview,
each of which may incorporate several questions. This more flexible approach to
questioning aims to recreate a conversational style, with the opportunity to return to a
particular line of questions at a later stage in the interview without it appearing unusual.
Drawing the interview to a close
Unfinished business:
As the agreed deadline approaches, it then becomes easier to wind down the interview
(for example, “I see that we are approaching the time that we agreed to finish the
interview...”). This also provides a good opportunity to introduce some important
questions that may have been left out so far, or which have arisen in the course of the
interview itself (for example, “But before I finish I wonder if I could ask you two final
questions”). This also ‘marks out’ these questions as somewhat different from the others,
enabling you to perhaps ask about something less tied to the previous line of questioning.
Thanking the interviewee:
It is important to thank the interviewee, out of courtesy, even if the interview has proved
to be a waste of time. It also helps to generate a response to the following point.
Anything to add?
By the end of the allotted time, the interviewee will have a much clearer idea of why I
came to see them in the first place. So, after the thanks, I ask the interviewee whether
they wish to add anything. Often this generates useful new information (for example, “you
should really go and see Mr X” or “I recommend that you try and read this report”, or
“”Have you thought about looking at this aspect of the problem?”. Sometimes, the most
important result of an interview may be the contact that it provides with another
interviewee who turns out to be even more informative.
Can we keep in touch?
As I leave, I always ask whether I could trouble the interviewee again If I need to clarify
something that they have said, or to follow up a point arising from the interview. I never
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
61
suggest that I might be asking for another interview as this may be embarrassing for the
interviewee to refuse. Instead I suggest contact via phone, fax, or email if necessary. I have
never had a refusal!
Don’t forget to leave your contact number(s) and/or address(es) with the interviewees.
Andrew Nickson, IDD
Focus Group Discussions
This method of data collection involves bringing together a small group of participants to discuss one
or more topics in relation to your study. Focus group discussions typically last for 1 to 2 hours and
involve around 3 to 8 participants. However, there are no fixed rules on this. I have conducted focus
groups with as few as 2 participants and as many as 14. As with semi-structured interviews, the
researcher will normally provide a checklist of topics for discussion. However, the checklist will
usually be shorter than that used for semi-structured interviews, in order to allow time for
interaction between the participants. Discussions can often go to a deeper level than would normally
occur in semi-structured interviews, as participants examine each other’s arguments and bounce
ideas off one another. This process can also help participants to clarify and develop their own
thinking on particular issues or topics. Another advantage is that participants may feel that they can
express their views more freely within a group discussion than in an interview situation, as the group
can take joint ownership of the views expressed.
Focus group discussions are particularly useful for research on attitudes and opinions, as well as
exploring issues in greater depth, and for generating possible solutions to development-related
problems. The composition of the focus group may well determine how successful it is in achieving
these aims. As Mikkelsen (2005) observes, certain group dynamics can bring forward useful extra
information. Bringing together a diverse group of stakeholders, for example, can increase awareness
of differing perspectives among participants, perhaps encouraging them to re-examine their own
views and feelings. Homogeneous groups (i.e. groups which are comprised of people that have some
particular common ground) may find it natural to engage with each other, leading to a more open
and honest discussion. Your decision on the make-up of the focus group is an important
consideration, and may well depend on the nature of your study. If you are conducting research
among vulnerable or marginalised people, for example, you may feel that focus groups should be as
homogeneous as possible, since some participants will lack confidence and may feel intimidated by
the presence of those who have power or authority over them. Many researchers choose to
conduct separate focus groups for female and male participants, for similar reasons.
If you are going to conduct focus groups, you will need to decide on a strategy for bringing
participants together at a suitable time and in a suitable place, which participants can easily reach and
where they will feel comfortable. Sometimes this can be arranged via gatekeepers (see Section 3.4.1).
Once the focus group is set up, you then have an important role as facilitator. You will need to begin
by introducing yourself and your study, in much the same way as you would for an interview. You
would then lay down any ground rules that you think may be necessary for a fruitful discussion. For
example, you may give some guidance as to how long you think the whole discussion will take and
how long should be spent discussing each topic. Then, to get things started, you could ask each
participant to introduce themselves. This will give everyone a chance to have their voice heard from
the outset, and hopefully help them to feel at ease. As the discussion develops, you will have to use
your own judgement as to when to let things flow, and when you need to intervene, in order to
bring the discussion back on track. You may also need to intervene in order to bring in those who
may be shy or not expected to contribute, since discussions can often be dominated by powerful or
extrovert individuals. At the end of the discussion, you should briefly summarise the main points of
agreement (and disagreement), and check that participants agree that your summary accurately
reflects the discussion.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
62
Direct Observation
Direct observation involves simply observing activities that are relevant to your particular topic. For
example, if you are conducting research within an organisation, it may be useful to observe meetings
that take place within the organisation, or to watch how staff members interact with each other, or
with managers, or with clients. The aim is usually to be as unobtrusive as possible, so that the
potentially biasing impact of your very presence on people’s behaviour is minimised. It may be useful
to use recording equipment, such as a video camera, when conducting observation, with appropriate
consent. Direct observation methods are usually employed short-term and from a detached
standpoint. This is quite distinct from participant observation, which normally involves the
researcher embedding themselves within a particular context, culture or organisation for a longer
period of time, as with ethnographic research.
3.4.2
Analysing Qualitative Data
In qualitative research, hypotheses and theories are usually (but not always) constructed from the
emerging data, rather than being formed in advance. Analysing qualitative data, therefore, normally
involves identifying themes and ideas that are contained within the data, in order to reach
conclusions, possibly in the form of plausible hypotheses or tentative theories, which are supported
by the data. In practice, you may find yourself analysing the data you are collecting as you go along –
getting a sense of what the data is telling you. However, the full analysis will normally take place
following completion of the data collection process. It is important that you document the steps that
you take in analysing the data, so that you can clearly explain how you arrived at your study
conclusions. This section will describe a simple approach to transcribing, analysing and presenting
your data:
Transcribing
When qualitative data is collected through interviews or focus groups it is first necessary to
transcribe your recorded data, whether this is in the form of a tape recording or written notes. This
simply involves producing a written record of the recorded data that is as clear and accurate as
possible. In my experience, this is best done soon after the data has been collected – ideally on the
same day. The longer you leave it, the harder it will be to make sense of your recordings, especially
if some parts are unclear or missing. Another advantage of early transcribing is that you will be more
likely to recall small incidents that occurred during the interview or focus group discussion, such as
some revealing body language or a certain tone of voice used, which may help you to gain a fuller
understanding of the topic that you are investigating. Commenting on these small occurrences will
add to the fullness and quality of your transcripts.
Coding
Having produced the transcripts, the next step is to code and categorise the data, in order to
highlight particular themes or certain types of events that are relevant to your research questions.
Ideally, the categories should relate to your key study variables. To go back to my previous example
of a study on the social welfare of diamond miners in Sierra Leone, ‘working conditions’ could be a
key study variable. You could use a coloured marker pen to highlight any comments about the
physical conditions in which miners work, then a different colour to highlight any data referring to
the hours of work, then another colour to highlight any data on the way in which miners’ grievances
are dealt with and so on. Similarly, comments which relate to particular aspects of ‘social welfare’,
such as worker morale, or contact time with families, could be coded. You could also code field
notes that you have made while carrying out direct observations in the same way. Through this
coding process, you have effectively broken your key variables down into more clearly defined subvariables. It should then be possible to examine the various relationships between these subvariables.
Presenting qualitative data
Before presenting your data, you need to identify the main messages that your data contains, and
how these relate to your research questions. These messages are sometimes presented in the form
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
63
of tentative hypotheses or theories. Your task then is to show how your data supports these
conclusions. There may be direct statements or observations that support your conclusions, but you
should also look for subtle inferences that can provide additional support. It is important to
recognise parts of the data that do not support your conclusions, or which highlight certain
limitations or exceptions. This is quite common in qualitative research as it is very unlikely that all of
your data will fully support any particular idea or hypothesis. When presenting your analysis, it is
important to not to fall into the trap of simply describing what people have told you. Your report
needs to have some explanatory value, so you need to actually interpret your data, based on the
analysis that you have carried out, in order to support your findings. It can be helpful to use
illustrations to supplement the text. For example, a diagram or chart could be used to show the
various factors that are thought to have contributed to the success or failure of a particular
intervention, which you can then refer to in the text.
Analysing qualitative data is a bit like putting together the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, with each piece
representing the individual thoughts and perspectives contained within your data. The aim is to
present these shared or competing perspectives in a way that coherently supports your study
conclusions. It is important to take account of the whole data set, including those ideas that do not
necessarily fully support your findings, and to avoid giving too much weight to particular viewpoints
which are not widely held within your sample of respondents. The final picture that you present may
not be perfect, but it should provide a realistic and accurate representation of the multiple messages
contained within your data.
It is sometimes useful to disaggregate your findings, in order to make more sense of them. For
example, if you have collected data from a range of stakeholder groups (see Section 3.4.1), then it
makes sense to disaggregate your findings by stakeholder group (this is known as stakeholder
analysis). This simply means going back to your coding and looking at how often particular responses
were coded for each stakeholder group. A view that is shared by different stakeholder groups with
very different interests should perhaps be given more weight than one that is held by respondents
from one group only.
Box 3.13 – Suggested Reading
Mason, J. (2002) ‘Making Convincing Arguments with Qualitative Data. In Mason, J.
(2002) (Ed) Qualitative Researching. London: Sage, pp. 173-203.
This chapter discusses various ways of using qualitative data to put forward arguments,
and how to link these arguments to theoretical insights, whether these have driven your
research from the outset or arisen from the data.
Try the following reflection exercise:
Box 3.14 - Reflection Activity: Seeking Alternative Explanations
Consider any qualitative research study with which you are familiar. Carefully read the
study findings, and consider any theories or hypotheses presented. Then see if you can
think of any rival hypotheses or theories that may explain the findings. If you can think of
any, do these invalidate the findings, in your opinion?
3.5
Mixed Methods
Quantitative and qualitative methodologies tend to differ in terms of the types of data collected, how
data is collected and how data is analysed. However, there is also some common ground between
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
64
the two methodological approaches. It should not be assumed that quantitative methods should only
be used for theory testing (or deductive) research, and that qualitative methods should be reserved
for theory building (or inductive) research. It is quite possible to use either quantitative or qualitative
methods, whichever strategy is adopted, or even to consider combining the two approaches. The
important thing is to choose the methods, or combination of methods, that will best enable you to
answer your research questions.
Quantitative and qualitative methodological approaches each have their own strengths and
weaknesses, so by combining them it may be possible to have the best of both worlds. For example,
quantitative methods are often useful for identifying relationships between variables, but qualitative
methods may be more useful when it comes to exploring the underlying reasons for those
relationships. So, if the purpose of your research is to identify whether a particular relationship
exists, and then, if it does, to ask why it exists, then a mixed methods approach might be the best
way forward. Bryman (1992) provides some other reasons for using a mixed methods approach:

Triangulation
This refers to the use of multiple sources in order to verify research findings. So, for
example, the findings of qualitative research can be cross-checked against those produced by
quantitative methods, or through an analysis of documentary sources. Triangulation can add
rigour to your investigation, helping to strengthen the case that you are building to support
your findings, or to highlight areas of uncertainty.

Providing a more general picture
Quantitative methods tend to be more wide-ranging and, hence, may help to plug the gaps
left by a qualitative study (particularly one with a short time-frame!).

Researchers’ and subjects’ perspectives
Quantitative methods tend to be driven by the researchers’ concerns, while qualitative
methods tend to be driven, or at least more strongly influenced, by participant perspectives.
Combining methods can help to bring these perspectives together.

Bridging macro and micro levels
Quantitative methods are often useful for exploring large-scale structural aspects of society,
while qualitative methods may be more suited to exploring small-scale behavioural aspects.
Combining methods can facilitate a study that explores both levels.
It is possible to combine methods at any stage of the research process, depending on the nature of
the problem that you are investigating. Quantitative and qualitative methods can be used together,
such as when qualitative methods are used within an experimental research design. It is also possible
to conduct quantitative and qualitative research separately, and then to compare the results of each
when discussing the findings. By thinking in terms of a mixed methods approach you can consider
which methods may be best suited to each aspect, or stage, of your study, rather than being
constrained within a single methodological approach for the whole study. Having said this, it is
important to guard against the study becoming overly complex, given the constraints that
you are faced with, particularly in terms of time and resources.
3.6
Ethical Issues
Students who are planning to collect primary data for their dissertations need to complete an Ethical
Review Form, which is available on Canvas. This applies whether you are using face-to-face
methods or remote methods (surveys/Skype interviews etc.). The form should be returned to your
supervisor, who needs to sign it off in order to confirm that he or she is satisfied that you have given
due consideration to any ethical concerns. Any potential or actual ethical concerns that arise during
the course of your study should also be discussed in your dissertation, together with an explanation
as to how you have tried to address them.
You should read carefully the University of Birmingham Code of Practice for Research, available at
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
65
https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/university/legal/research.pdf.
It is a good idea to state in your dissertation that you have been guided by this Code. Another very
useful code is the ESRC Framework for Research Ethics, available at
https://esrc.ukri.org/files/funding/guidance-for-applicants/esrc-framework-for-research-ethics-2015/
Here are some of the most common ethical issues that you may need to consider:

Trust
Relationships between researchers and respondents should be based, as far as possible, on
trust. You should be careful not to act in a way that could undermine this trust.

Avoiding harm
You should seek to ensure that respondents are not adversely affected (for example,
physically, socially, financially or psychologically) by their participation in your study.

Consent
Respondents should freely consent to participating in your study. They should not be
pressurised or coerced into participation. Consent will only be meaningful (or ‘informed’) if
they fully understand the nature, purpose and likely consequences of your study.

Raising expectations
You should take care to avoid inflating the expectations of respondents as to the likely
outcomes of your study. This can be avoided by giving very clear and realistic information
about the study and making sure that it is fully understood.

Gatekeepers
Where respondents are accessed via ‘gatekeepers’, the informed consent of the respondents
should still be sought, and the interests of the gatekeepers should be protected.

Vulnerable participants
Special care is needed where potential research subjects are children or other vulnerable
persons who may not be able to give informed consent. For Masters dissertations, IDD
advises against collecting data from children or from adults who do not have the capacity to
provide informed consent. If you are considering doing this then you must discuss this with
your supervisor and will almost certainly need to engage with the University’s full ethical
review procedure, which is a lengthy process.

Withdrawal
Respondents should be made aware that they have a right to withdraw from the study at any
stage, and for any data that they have provided to be withdrawn.

Anonymity
Respondents should be informed that they have a right to anonymity. Even when
respondents are willing to be named in the research, you should be aware of the risk of
unintended negative consequences or repercussions. If in doubt, it is better not to name the
respondent. Researchers should also be aware of the risk of unintentionally identifying
respondents (by referring to their job titles, for example).

Confidentiality
Research data should be treated as confidential and stored securely until the dissertation has
been marked, at which point it should be destroyed. Any personal data collected should not
be used for purposes other than those for which they were collected. Where sensitive
information is supplied by respondents, researchers should consider whether or not it
should be recorded at all.

Privacy
The privacy of respondents should be respected. Respondents also have the right to reject
the use of electronic recording equipment, such as video cameras and Dictaphones.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
66

Covert data collection methods
Covert methods should be used only if absolutely necessary; that is, there are no overt
methods capable of obtaining the required information. Proposed uses of covert methods
should always be discussed with your dissertation supervisor beforehand, and would
probably need to be sanctioned via the University’s full ethical review procedure. If such
methods are to be used, protecting the anonymity of research subjects is essential, especially
if the research is undertaken in non-public spaces.

Accuracy
Researchers have an ethical duty to report information obtained accurately. You should
certainly never consider fabricating data or falsifying information given.

Dissemination
It is important to disseminate your research widely, in order for it to achieve maximum
impact. This is also important from an ethical standpoint, when you have made promises to
research subjects or participating organisations to share your research findings with them.

Payment
In general, payment should not be made to research participants, as this may be viewed as a
form of coercion. However, some consideration may be given to reimbursing expenses
(such as travel expenses) or paying for refreshments.
Finally, for those considering fieldwork trips it essential to consider the ethical implications in
relation to the Coronavirus pandemic. Many countries around the world will continue to be affected
by the pandemic for the foreseeable future, and within these countries are many people who are at
particularly high risk of infection. It is essential to consider the risks of transmitting the virus through
face-to-face contact, even in countries where infection rates are relatively low. There is also the risk
that if you become ill yourself you may be adding to the pressure on local health services that are
already struggling to cope. Difficult ethical judgements may well need to be made and it is essential
that you discuss these issues with your supervisor before going ahead with fieldwork.
Box 3.15 – Suggested Reading
Read Chapter Three, entitled ‘Ethics: It’s the Right Thing To Do’ in Ruane, J. (2016)
Introducing Social Research Methods: Essentials for Getting the Edge.
Chichester: Wiley & Sons.
This chapter explores some of the ethical issues summarised above, including avoiding
harm, obtaining consent and protecting privacy, in much greater depth.
Dissertation Handbook Part 3: Methodological Approaches
67
Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and Marking
Writing up the dissertation is a lengthy and continuous process which should not be left until the
very end! It is essential to have your literature review and methodology chapters drafted before
conducting any fieldwork. It is very likely that you will have to go back and make changes to these
chapters at a later stage, as your study evolves and you gather feedback from your supervisor and
colleagues, but this should not deter you from beginning the writing process at an early stage.
While dissertations can vary in terms of how they are structured and presented, certain basic
elements will need to be included. These include an introduction, a literature review, an explanation
of the methodology, a presentation and analysis of your study findings and a conclusion. Part Four
begins with some general advice in relation to each of these basic elements. It then goes on to
provide some practical guidance on formatting and submitting your dissertation. Finally the marking
procedure is explained.
4.1
Writing up the Dissertation
4.1.1
The Preliminaries
The preliminaries will usually include a title, acknowledgements, an abstract, a list of contents and a
list of acronyms. It is important to take care over these because they set the tone for the whole
dissertation. If the preliminaries are untidy or inaccurate then a poor impression is created right
from the outset.
Title
Good titles are usually designed to catch the attention of the reader. However, you should also
ensure that your title accurately reflects what your study is about. Your initial choice of title is
mainly for administrative purposes and will probably change later on. You should keep your title in
mind throughout the study and make a final decision on it right at the very end.
Acknowledgements
It is conventional to briefly acknowledge the contributions of those who have assisted with your
study in some way, particularly your supervisor and any individuals or organisations that helped to
facilitate your data collection.
Abstract
The abstract should provide a short and succinct summary of the study, including the aims of your
research, the reasons for it (or why it is valuable), a brief description of your research design and
methods, your main findings and conclusions. Writing a good abstract is quite a difficult skill, because
it is necessary to be very concise, while including all the important information and making your
study sound interesting. My advice is to read through the abstracts of several past dissertations, as
well as published research papers, in order to get an idea of what is required.
Contents
The contents should be logically structured and neatly presented, so that the reader can see at a
glance how your dissertation is structured and easily find their way around it. Remember to provide
a list of tables and figures, as well as listing the chapters and sub-headings. Some computer word
processing packages have the facility to create a contents page, with a choice of layouts. These can
be very convenient because your table can be updated whenever page numbers change. Whichever
method you use, ensure that your page numbers are correct before handing your dissertation in!
Acronyms and Abbreviations
You will almost certainly make use of acronyms, and possibly abbreviations, throughout your
dissertation, and these should be alphabetically listed at the start, for ease of reference.
Dissertation Handbook Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and Marking
68
4.1.2
The Introduction
As with the preliminaries, your introductory chapter has an important role to play in making a good
initial impression. You should aim to really catch the interest of the reader by explaining why your
study is interesting, relevant and useful. Sometimes a good way to approach this is to explain how
you became interested in the topic yourself.
A good introduction will usually include some background on you, as the researcher, and a brief
overview of the topic. It should also present your research questions, which are the central focus of
your study, and explain why they are important. The introduction may also contain brief descriptions
of the following:





4.1.3
the research strategy and design;
key concepts or conceptual frameworks that will guide your research;
the main research methods to be used;
any study limitations envisaged at the outset; and
the overall structure of the dissertation.
The Literature Review
The most conventional and straightforward approach is to set aside a chapter for the literature
review, but there are alternatives. You should certainly make reference to relevant literature
throughout your dissertation and you may choose to integrate your literature review within various
other chapters. However you approach the task, it is important to ensure that your literature
review is not disconnected from the rest of the study. You should link forward to it from the
introduction and refer back to it when discussing your study findings towards the end of
dissertation. Part Two provides more detailed guidance on structuring and presenting the literature
review.
4.1.4
The Methodology
The methodology chapter, or chapters, should describe in detail your research strategy and design,
as well as the methods that you will use to collect and analyse empirical data. Explain how methods
that you have selected are consistent with the research philosophy that guides your research (see
Part One), and how they will help you to answer your research questions. You should discuss the
strengths and weakness of the approaches that you have adopted and reflect on the methodological
choices that you have made (perhaps also discussing alternatives choices that you may have made).
Virtually all research projects work within certain constraints, and these should be made explicit. For
example, if your decision to adopt a purposive sampling strategy was influenced by time and
resource limitations then do not hesitate to acknowledge this. It is also quite normal for the
methodology to change direction as the study evolves. If this has happened, you should try to
describe the methodological journey, explaining the strategic decisions that you have made at
various stages. Finally, you should take account of ethical considerations and describe how these
have affected the methodological decisions that you have made.
4.1.5
The Study Findings
This is where you get to show how you have used the data that you have gathered, whether from
secondary sources or through your own fieldwork, to address the research questions. It is
important that you coherently explain how you have analysed your data and present the findings in
the form of logical arguments. A good starting point is to devise a plan or basic structure, which
accommodates your whole data set and presents your findings, or arguments, in a logical order. The
research questions themselves may suggest a logical order, particularly if each question represents a
particular theme of your research. You can then begin your findings chapter with an introduction
that outlines the structure that you have decided on, thus presenting an overview of this crucial part
of your study.
Dissertation Handbook Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and
Marking
69
Your structure will depend to some extent on the research strategy that you have adopted. If you
are working deductively, for example, you will probably start by restating your research hypothesis,
then go on to explain how you have used the data to test this hypothesis, and finally discuss the
implications, in terms of the validity of the hypothesis. If you are working inductively, on the other
hand, then you will probably start by explaining how you have analysed your data, and then go on to
discuss any possible hypotheses or theoretical ideas that arise from the data, and which may help to
address your research questions.
As you write up your findings, it is helpful to make reference to the key concepts that you have
identified earlier in your dissertation, and to the relevant literature that you have reviewed. This will
help to ensure that the whole dissertation is linked together in a meaningful way. Hopefully your
findings will shed some light on relevant concepts and issues that have emerged from your literature
review. Most importantly, though, you must make it very clear how your findings relate to your
research questions.
The arguments that you put forward should be evidence-based, and the strength of your evidence
should be clear. The way in which you frame data, as you present your arguments, can help the
reader to assess the relative weight of each piece of evidence that you use to support your findings.
Here are some examples:
Box 4.1 – Framing Data to Support Arguments





“As one Kenyan academic noted …”
“A human rights worker in the affected area described the policy as …”
“focus group members in Kono identified a range of explanations for this, including
…”
“I witnessed a number of community meetings on where the issue was raised …”
“graffiti in the area is a visible sign on discontent with the policy”
In the each of the examples above the findings that are presented are evidence-based,
because each statement begins with the evidence source.
Consider the following statement:
“ Human rights groups in Rwanda are scared to criticise the government”
On its own, there is no evidence to support this argument. Now consider the following
statement:
“There is some evidence to suggest that it is not easy for human rights groups in
Rwanda to freely express their views. Representatives from three human rights
groups that I interviewed all reported that they were scared to criticise the
government”
Now the argument is backed by clear evidence.
Try and put yourself in the position of the reader and ask yourself whether you would be convinced
by the arguments put forward. If you feel that there are limitations to some of your arguments then
acknowledge these limitations.
The following reflection activity is designed to guide you through the process of structuring your
study findings.
Dissertation Handbook Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and
Marking
70
Box 4.2 - Reflection Activity: Structuring your Study Findings
By this stage, your study will probably be at an advanced stage, and you should have a good
idea about what the main themes and ideas contained within your research are. Reflect on
these and try to write down a list of section and sub-section headings for the ‘study findings’
section of your final report. Then write down the main points and observations arising
from your investigation, and see if you can assign each of these to one of the section
headings that you have listed. If you complete this task, you will have effectively produced
a draft structure for presenting your study findings. Leave it for a few days, then read it
through and consider the following questions:
1. Is there a logical sequence to your structure?
2. Are all the points made relevant to the section to which they have been assigned?
3. Are there any sections which will require a more detailed explanation than the
others?
4. Would any of the sections benefit from a diagram or chart, in order to illustrate
the points made?
5. Should any of the points be emphasised with a quotation?
6. Are there any important messages contained within your data which do not seem
to fit into your structure? If so, how can the structure be changed to accommodate
them?
4.1.6
The Conclusions
The final chapter of the dissertation will contain your study conclusions. This should be more than a
simple summary of what has gone before. Here are some of the main elements that you should
consider including:

Summary
Provide a brief summary of your main study findings.

Explaining the significance of your study
This is perhaps the most important part of your concluding chapter. You need to explain
how your study findings relate to the general body of literature in your field. You should
refer back to your literature review and also to your research questions. Has your study
helped to fill a knowledge gap, or shed some light on a particular issue or concept
highlighted by the literature? This is the point at which you may even start to theorise
(although be sure that any theories that you put forward are supported by your data!).

Implications for future policy and practice
Any recommendations for future policy and/or practice should be firmly based on your
study findings. Whilst it is not essential to make such recommendations, doing so will help to
demonstrate that your research has some practical value, as well as hopefully being
interesting.

Stating the limitations
There are always likely to be limitations to your study findings, and these should be clearly
stated in your concluding chapter. There may be limitations in terms of generalisability, for
example, or in terms of the reliability of your findings. Try to be as realistic about this as
Dissertation Handbook Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and
Marking
71
possible. It is far better to make modest claims that you have confidence in than bold claims
that can easily be knocked down.

4.1.7
Suggestions for future research
It is very likely that your study will have revealed areas where further research would be
useful, in order to deepen our understanding of the topic that you have been investigating,
or perhaps a related topic. Your suggestions for further research will help to demonstrate
that you are aware of the current state of knowledge in your field.
The References
The reference list should include any books or articles that you have referenced in your study,
recorded in the Harvard referencing style. Take care to ensure that all references are included and
recorded accurately. Do not include sources that have not been cited in your study.
4.1.8
The Appendices
The Appendix is a convenient place to provide additional material that would interrupt the flow of
your arguments if included within the main text of the dissertation. These may include, for example,
interview questions and schedules or relevant tables and charts. Each piece should be numbered and
titled. Appendices do not count towards the word count and should not be of central importance to
the study. In other words, it should be possible to read and understand the whole dissertation
without referring to the appendices.
4.2 Formatting and Submitting your Dissertation.
Although the nature of your project will influence the final format of each dissertation, there are
certain rules that all IDD dissertations must follow. These are:
 The word count of the dissertation should be between 10,000 and 12,000 words. There is no
10% allowance for the dissertation, and penalties are applied to dissertations that exceed the
word limit. The synopsis/abstract, acknowledgements, contents page, reference list, annexes,
tables, figures, diagrams and footnotes are not included in the word count.
 The dissertation should be typed 1.5 or double-spaced (your choice) with a reasonable font size
(12 point – please consider your markers’ eyes!) and with at least 2.5cm margins all round. All
pages should be numbered. The best position for the page number is at bottom-centre of the
page. Each chapter of the dissertation should start on a new page.
 The first (cover) page of the dissertation should include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The name of the student and student registration number;
The degree programme and year of submission;
The title of the dissertation;
The name of the supervisor;
The word count of the dissertation.
 Acknowledgements may be included on a separate page after the cover page if you wish.
 The second page of the dissertation should include an abstract or synopsis of the dissertation,
which is approximately 300 words in length (i.e. no more than one page), including its main
conclusions (see Section 4.1.1).
 The third page should be the table of contents, giving page numbers for each chapter, section and
appendix. Sections and subsections should be clearly distinguished, systematically enumerated and
given descriptive titles.
Dissertation Handbook Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and
Marking
72
 A separate page with a list of acronyms (if required)
 A separate page with a list of tables/boxes/etc. (if required)
 Chapter 1 should be a general introduction. This should clearly state what the dissertation is
about, your research question, why the topic is important, how you intend to tackle it, the
problems encountered or limitations and a brief summary of the content and structure of the
dissertation (see Section 4.1.2).
 Other chapters will constitute the body of your report, but one of these must address the
methodology that you used.
 The final chapter should contain your conclusions.
 Graphs and tables, with brief titles, should be numbered serially and inserted in the relevant pages
of the report. If they are very long they may be included in the appendix at the end of the
dissertation. Sources, with dates, should be given at the bottom of each graph or table.
Footnotes or end-notes (but not both) may be used, but should be kept to a minimum.
 After your concluding chapter you should give a list of references you have used, presented
alphabetically in Harvard format.
 Finally present any appendices, which should be referred to at the appropriate point in the
dissertation. These should include major statistical data or material that cannot be fitted into the
chapter and/or other relevant documents such as checklists, questionnaires, interview questions,
participant information forms, consent forms etc. Please do not include interview transcripts.
 You should submit your dissertation via Canvas for electronic marking. Please ensure that you
submit on time (unless you have an authorised extension) to avoid a late submission penalty,
which is mandatory under University of Birmingham rules.
The boxed text below addresses some common issues that often arise in the final weeks, leading up
to submission:
Box 4.3: Some Final Month Tips for your Dissertation
Submit on time
- It sounds obvious but the university’s rules on late penalties (5 percentage points deduction
per working day) mean that submitting just a few days late can make it difficult or impossible
to pass at the first attempt.
If you have had problems, consider applying for an extension now
- If you have had issues like illness or family problems, consider applying for an extension now.
- If you leave it to the last minute, the decision may take some time and you might be under a
lot of stress not knowing whether you will get the extension or not.
- Remember only the Wellbeing Team can grant extensions. Your supervisor cannot.
- The Wellbeing Team can be contacted on gov.wellbeing@contacts.bham.ac.uk
- Please be aware that using an extension is likely to delay your graduation, as your work may
not be marked in time for the exam board.
Dissertation Handbook Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and
Marking
73
Remember the word limit in the dissertations is strict
- The upper limit is 12,000 words (see Section 4.3)
- Unlike assignments, there is no 10% allowance. If you write 12,001 words then we have to
give you a penalty!
- You should not try to evade the word limit by shifting material that should be in the main
text into those tables, footnotes, appendices etc. If it is important to the dissertation, it
should be in the main text; a reader should be able to ignore footnotes/appendices and still
have the key information they need.
Remember that final dissertations are submitted routinely to Turnitin
- We don’t routinely submit drafts that you share with your supervisor to Turnitin so this will
be the first time your text has been checked.
- Make sure you have followed the standard rules on identifying quoted text and citing of all
sources, using Harvard referencing.
- Guidance on plagiarism, referencing and using quoted text is available in multiple places
including at https://intranet.birmingham.ac.uk/as/registry/policy/conduct/plagiarism/index.aspx
Paid-for dissertations
- Some students have been telling us they have been approached by individuals or companies
offering to write their dissertations.
- Obviously, this would be plagiarism and be serious academic misconduct under the
university’s rules. Where serious academic misconduct is found to have taken place, a range
of sanctions are possible, including the failure of the programme overall.
- If use of third parties to write a dissertation is suspected, then the normal procedure for
dealing with plagiarism is used. The student involved would be invited, as a first step, to a
meeting to discuss the suspected misconduct.
- Limited use of proof-readers is permitted. See below for guidance on using proof-readers
Make sure your dissertation is consistent between chapters
- You will have been drafting your dissertation in sequence over several months so it may have
been some time since you set your research questions, did your literature review, drafted
your methods chapter and did your initial analysis.
- So make a check that, when you put the chapters together, they all fit. For example:
o Are the questions you set out to answer, the ones you have answered?
o Are the methods you said you would adopt, the ones you did adopt?
o Have you related your own analysis and conclusions to what you said the literature
was saying?
o Are the conclusions in your final chapter clearly supported by the detailed analysis in
your analysis chapter(s)?
Proof-read your final submission carefully
- It’s important that your dissertation is clear, precise and accurate. That requires accurate use
of language so a thorough proof-reading will benefit every dissertation.
- The university permits you to use proof-readers to check your work. But this must be
limited to checking the clarity of the language used. It cannot, for example, include improving
the substance of your academic arguments or adding new arguments.
- Note that good proof-readers may be costly and may need significant time to turn around
their check.
Dissertation Handbook Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and
Marking
74
-
-
-
Only you can check that your language does actually convey your meaning and does so
consistently through your text so, even if you use a proof-reader, you still need to do your
own check
You should always check the spelling with a spell-checker. It’s best to use one with a UK
English setting.
Grammar checkers can help. Some students have found that specialist grammar checkers like
Grammarly are better than those built into MS Word. Grammarly has both a free and a paid
version but even the free version can probably improve your writing
Be careful when using spell-checkers and grammar-checkers – not every suggestion they
make will be correct so you have to think about the accuracy of their suggestions.
Assembling the complete dissertation may take longer than you think
- Students naturally spend most of their time on the main chapters of their dissertation. But
other elements are important for a polished submission, especially the reference list, the
table of contents and lists of abbreviations or glossaries (where relevant).
- You may also have cross-references from one part of your dissertation to another so you
need accurate use of page numbers and/or chapter/section numbers.
- This all takes longer than you may think to do well so don’t leave it to the last minute
- Dissertations produced in a hurry often have missing or wrong or inconsistent referencing
so pay particular attention to this.
- There is lots of specific detailed guidance on Harvard referencing including at
https://intranet.birmingham.ac.uk/as/libraryservices/library/referencing/icite/harvard/index.asp
x
The abstract is more important than you might think
- The abstract will be the first thing the second marker looks at after your title and it will
frame how they understand and assess your work.
- But some students produce these in a hurry at the very end.
- So make sure the abstract is clear and concise.
- It should cover what you set out to do, your methods and what you found - but all briefly so
you must focus only on the most important elements.
- Try to make it interesting.
- If your supervisor is looking at a full draft of your dissertation, then try to make sure the
draft abstract is included.
Work with your supervisor
- Few students actually fail their dissertations in IDD. The few who do have usually not
engaged well with their supervisor so make sure this does not apply to you.
- Pay attention to any guidance from your supervisor on dates when they are available, any
deadlines they have given you for draft submissions etc.
Don’t Panic!
- The vast majority of students pass and do so at their first attempt.
- If you follow our advice (especially that of your supervisor) and work in an organised way
between now and submission, you should get the result you deserve.
If you have worries about any of this, then your supervisor is the first place to go for help.
Simon De Lay, IDD.
Dissertation Handbook Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and
Marking
75
4.3 Marking Procedure
The dissertation will be marked by your supervisor, who will provide detailed feedback, and then
second marked by another IDD staff member. The second marker will also provide some feedback,
but this will normally be briefer. The two markers will together agree on the final mark. However, in
the unlikely event that the two markers cannot agree on the final mark then a third marker will be
asked to adjudicate. In providing feedback and deciding on the final mark, the markers will be guided
by the Canvas Marking Rubrik, which requires consideration of the following:

Research Design and Methods
The degree to which the dissertation has been carefully devised and conceived; has clear
aims and objectives; adopts an appropriate choice of methods to address the research
questions/hypotheses identified; demonstrates an understanding of the relevant
methodologies used and their limitations; and the use of innovative methodological
approaches where appropriate.

Evidence of Key Skills
How well you structure a paper (with a beginning, middle and an end) as well as the clarity
with which you express yourself in writing (how one point logically and clearly leads to the
next) is an important consideration in marking. More practical aspects are also taken into
account here, for example, using proper referencing and an accompanying bibliography,
formatting your work tidily and consistently, and showing evidence of sustained research.

Theoretical and Conceptual Perspectives

Analysis and Originality
The degree to which the dissertation contextualises and conceptualises the issue(s) under
investigation; addresses the specific research questions/ hypotheses identified; draws
successfully on the identified literatures, any relevant secondary material and where
appropriate primary data collection in this process; is analytical (rather than descriptive) in
its approach; and demonstrates signs of original thinking or new insights

Conclusions (and Recommendations if appropriate)
The degree to which the conclusions are clear and soundly constructed and properly
address all the key issues under investigation

Structure and Presentation
The degree to which there is a logical and clear structure to the dissertation; with a
coherent and purposeful line of argument threading through; and the work is well written,
presented and properly referenced using the Harvard system.
This marking scheme helps to ensure consistency among markers, but it can also assist you as the
student. If you keep the marking scheme in mind as you write the dissertation you will hopefully fare
better when your dissertation is judged against these pre-determined criteria.
Dissertation Handbook Part 4: Writing Up, Formatting, Submission and
Marking
76
Part 5: Fieldwork Expenses and Travel Arrangements
MSc students may have the opportunity to carry out individual overseas fieldwork as part of their
dissertation research. However, please note that there is no guarantee that conducting oversees
fieldwork in 2021 will be possible (or justifiable, from an ethical standpoint – see Section 3.6), due to
the rapidly changing state of the global coronavirus pandemic. Part Five covers practical issues in
relation to claiming fieldwork expenses and making fieldwork travel arrangements.
Students must complete a full risk assessment and have this approved prior to making any fieldwork
arrangements, or committing any funds to fieldwork costs. Travel to countries or regions which the
FCDO ‘advise against all non-essential travel’ to cannot be supported.
5.1 Fieldwork Expenses
This section relates to the fieldwork expenses for students travelling individually for dissertation
fieldwork 2020-21 (not applicable to students studying on the MPA; MPA (Finance) and
MPA (Human Resources) programmes).
In the event that fieldwork can go ahead, eligible fieldwork research expenses (up to £1,500) can
be claimed back from the Department (see Section 5.13 below for a list of eligible expenses). It is
not possible to claim back for electronic equipment (including laptops/netbooks/cameras/tablets
etc.), books or meals/drinks.
5.1.1 Risk Assessment
Students must complete a full risk assessment and have this approved prior to making any fieldwork
arrangements, or committing any funds to fieldwork costs. Travel to countries or regions which the
FCDO ‘advise against all non-essential travel’ to cannot be supported.
5.1.2 Airfares
If travel is booked through two of the recognised University suppliers, i.e. Key Travel in Selly Oak or
STA in the Guild of Students, this can be paid for directly by the department. The process for which
is as follows:
Key Travel (birmingham@keytravel.com – 08451220102 – Team name – RUBY)
You can e-mail Key Travel for flight or hotel details. When you receive a quote, you will
need to forward this to Debra (idd.pg@contacts.bham.ac.uk) in the PG Office. She will
process this quote for you through the Finance Office and you will be copied into the order
to Key travel to confirm the booking for the flight/hotel. Key Travel will e-mail the tickets to
you.
Alternatively you could book through another source (internet – usually less expensive) and be
reimbursed on production of receipt.
5.1.3 Expenses
You can claim for the following items
Airfares
Accommodation
Transport (including taxis/ubers/buses/trains)
Translators if required
Photocopying/internet/phone
Medicine/vaccines
Visa costs (including travel costs to submit and collect the visa)
Dissertation Handbook Part 5: Fieldwork Expenses and Travel Arrangements
77
If you have any items of expenditure other than the above you would need to check with Debra in
the PG Office before submitting a claim.
5.1.4 Reimbursement
Expenses will be repaid, on production of receipts, directly into student’s personal bank accounts, it
is not possible to pay monies into another person’s bank account. It is essential that receipts are
produced for all items of expenditure as the University Finance Office will not make any refunds for
items that are not supported by receipts (original receipts are required, stating the amount that has
been paid). The University will not pay invoices (except as detailed above for airfares – see Section
5.1.2).
You will need to complete a statement of expenditure and a claim form (emailed to all students in
2021). To make claims, you will need to complete the personal details and bank account details on
the claim form electronically, and then print and sign (original signature required in the Claimant
section of form) and date the form. Only complete the yellow sections on the claim form and sign.
PLEASE DO NOT COMPLETE ANY OF THE OTHER SECTIONS ON THE CLAIM FORM THESE WILL BE COMPLETED BY THE POSTGRADUATE ADMINISTRATOR
Payment is made into a student’s bank account. This can take up to 6-8 weeks following submission
of claims. When submitting receipts it is requested that you submit all receipts (which should be the
original copies - please note that photocopies or scanned copies of receipts and credit card slips are
not accepted by the Finance Office) at the end of your visit (apart from the airfare which can be
processed for reimbursed before travelling for fieldwork, please also note visas and
medicines/vaccines that can be refunded before travel only on completion of the fieldwork
preparation form being completed before departure).
Please note that the final deadline for submitting claims to the PG administrator will be Friday 4th
September 2021 at 11.00am.
5.2 Travel Arrangements
5.2.1 Risk Assessment
Students must complete a full risk assessment and have this approved prior to making any fieldwork
arrangements, or committing any funds to fieldwork costs. Travel to countries or regions which the
FCDO ‘advise against all non-essential travel’ to cannot be supported.
5.2.2 Travel Insurance
You will be covered by University travel insurance during the period of your visit. You can register
yourself online at http://www.travelform.bham.ac.uk/journey_V2.asp
5.2.3 Safe to Travel
Please ensure that you have read the Foreign and Commonwealth Office information
(www.fco.gov.uk) on travel information to the country you will be travelling to and make sure that it
is safe to do so. Where there is clear advice not to travel to a particular country/or region of that
country then you should not do so. If you choose not to take the advice of the FCO you would not
be covered by travel insurance.
If you are travelling to a country which is your country of residence and the FCO website
information advises against travel then this does not apply, but it is unlikely the University would
provide travel insurance cover for the period of your dissertation fieldwork.
5.2.4 Fieldwork Preparation Form
As required by the university, the Postgraduate Administrator will need to know everyone’s travel
arrangements for fieldwork. All students must complete the Fieldwork Preparation Form (which
Dissertation Handbook Part 5: Fieldwork Expenses and Travel Arrangements
78
must be signed by your supervisor) and submit this to the PG Office before you travel, otherwise
this can result in your expenses not being reimbursed.
5.2.5 Tier 4 Students: Authorised Absence
For Tier 4 students – you must complete an authorised absence form, a minimum of 12 working
days before you travel (procedures on how to apply for an authorised absence will be sent by email).
If you plan to travel home for fieldwork and not return to the UK you must let the Postgraduate
Administrator know immediately (this must be agreed with your supervisor, as you are a registered
student with the University until the 30th September) and you must be in contact with your
supervisor on a regular basis until this date to show you are academically engaging in the
programme.
Updated September 2020 – this information is subject to change
Dissertation Handbook Part 5: Fieldwork Expenses and Travel Arrangements
79
5.3 Example: Statement of Expenditure
Name:
ID Number:
Programme/pathway:
Country visited:
Dates of travel:
Currency exchange rate:
(Please include a copy of the currency exchange rate you used)
Item of Expenditure
Local currency
GBP (Sterling)
Total
Total expenditure
Dissertation Handbook Part 5: Fieldwork Expenses and Travel Arrangements
80
References
Aveyard, H. (2007) Doing a Literature Review in Health and Social Care: A Practical
Guide, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Benton, T. & Craib, I. (2001) Philosophy of Social Science, Basingstoke: Palgrave
Blaikie, N. (2000) Designing Social Research: The Logic of Anticipation. Cambridge: Polity
Press
Boland, A., Cherry, G. & Dickson, R. (2017) ‘Carrying out a Systematic review as a Masters Thesis’
In Dickson, R. and Cherry, G. (Eds.) Doing a Systematic Review: A Student’s Guide, London: Sage,
1-20
Bryman, A. (1988) Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London: Unwin and Hyman
Bryman, A. (1992) ‘Quantitative and Qualitative Research: Further Reflections on their Integration’.
In Brannen, J. (ed) Mixed Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research. Aldershot:
Avebury.
Bryman, A. (2008) Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Third Edition).
Copestake, J., Johnson, S. & Wright-Revolledo, K. (2005) ‘Impact Assessment of Microfinance:
Protocol for Collection and Analysis of Qualitative Data’. In Holland, J. & Campbell, J. (Eds).
Methods in Development Research: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches. Warwickshire: ITDG Publishing. pp. 53-70.
Cresswell, J.W. (2003) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches.
Thousand Oaks: Sage (Second Edition)
De Vaus, D. (2001) Research Design in Social Research, London: Sage.
Fairclough, N. (2013) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. 2nd Edition. Oxon:
Routledge
Fraser, S., Flewitt, R. & Hammersley, M. (2014) ‘What is Research with Children and Young People.
In Clark, A., Flewitt, R., Hammersley, M. & Robb, M. (2014) Understanding Research with
Children and Young People. London: Sage, pp. 34-50.
Hakim, C. (2000) Research Design: successful designs for social and economic research,
London: Unwyn Hynman Ltd
Hammersley, M. (ed) (1993), Social Research: Philosophy, Politics and Practice, London:
Sage.
Hart, C. (1998), Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Imagination,
London: Sage.
Hughes, J. (1990) The Philosophy of Social Research, London: Longman, 2nd Edition.
Johnstone, B. (2018) Discourse Analysis. Third Edition. Chichester: Wiley & Sons.
Johnston, R. J. (1986) Philosophy and Human Geography: An Introduction to
Contemporary Approaches, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Kumar, J. (1999), Research Methods: A Step-by-step Guide for Beginners, London: Sage.
Laws, S. et al (2003) Research for Development: A Practical Guide. London: Sage
Marshall, P. (1997) Research Methods: How to Design and Construct a Successful Project,
Oxford: How To Books Ltd.
Mason, J. (2002) Qualitative Researching. London: Sage
Dissertation Handbook: References
81
Meth, P., and Williams, G. (2006), ‘Literature Reviews and Bibliographic Searches’, in Desai, V., and
Potter, R. (eds), Doing Development Research, London: Sage pp 209-221.
Mikkelsen, B. (2005) Methods for Development Work and Research: A New Guide for
Practitioners. London: Sage
Mukherjee, C. & Wuyts, M. (2007) ‘Thinking with Quantitative Data’. In Thomas, A. & Mohan, G.
(eds) (2007) Research Skills for Policy and Development. London: Sage. Pp 231-253
Neuman, W. L. (1994) Social Science Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Oliver, M. (1983) Social Work with Disabled People. Basingstoke: MacMillan
Oliver, P. (2012), Succeeding with your Literature Review, Maidenhead: Open University
Press.
Overton, J. and van Diermen, P. (2003) ‘Using Quantitative Techniques’. In Scheyvens, R. and Storey,
D. (eds) Development Fieldwork: A Practical Guide. London: Sage, pp. 37-46.
Punch, K. (1998) Introduction to Social Research, London: Sage.
Robson, C. (1993) Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner
Researchers, Oxford: Blackwell.
Ruane, J. (2016) Introducing Social Research Methods: Essentials for Getting the Edge.
Chichester: Wiley & Sons.
Silverman, D. (2000) Doing Qualitative Research; A Practical Handbook. London: Sage.
Somekh, B. & Lewin, C. (2005) Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Sage.
Thomas, A., and Mohan, G. (eds) (2007), Research Skills for Policy and Development, London:
Sage.
Thomas, A., Chataway, J., and Wuyts, M. (eds) (1998), Finding Out Fast: Investigative Skills for
Policy and Development, London: Sage.
Yin, R.K. (2008) Case study Research : Design and methods, London: Sage (Fourth Edition).
Dissertation Handbook: References
82