Identifying Research Gaps and Motivation

In terms of finding a research gap, I understand that for academic research you need to identify a gap within the extant literature so that you can situate your work.  Good research needs to address a gap in the existing literature as this provides a literature motivation and also, because your gap is based on prior literature you understand the contribution of your research in the context of other preceding studies.

I think that various ways of identifying a research gap include:

1.  Portraying the literature as incomplete (there are gaps that need to be filled);

2. Portraying it as inadequate (demonstrating that it excludes alternative perspectives);

3. Portraying it as incommensurate (showing that it is wrong or misguided in some way);

4. Presenting contradictory findings, mixed results/evidence that need reconciling;

5. Using the directions for future research in prior papers;

6. Limitations of prior work.

Based on academic papers I have read, I see that authors ‘problematise’.  In order words, you are constructing an argument that is embedded within the literature and clearly indicating that there is a problem that needs to be resolved.  Throughout the paper you are presenting your argument and you need to be persuasive and convincing.

I have also noticed that good research needs a clear thesis statement, which captures your argument and your position.  Basically, your research needs to further explain something that is not, as yet, understood, otherwise there would be no research.  I think it also helps is there is some tension, controversy or paradox.  This makes the research interesting.  

For example, the paper by Professor Jacobs on the struggle for legitimacy, highlights the paradox of performance auditing where performance auditing may simultaneously provide legitimacy to some actors while also challenging the legitimacy of others.  This tension grabs the attention of the target audience.

I think that qualitative and quantitative methods may complement and one another as one type of research method may lead to a study in the other research method, thereby providing a broader pool of potential research opportunities for a researcher.  For example, 

Quantitative research to qualitative research – explain unexpected results, anomalies  

Qualitative research to quantitative research – to get ideas for a research study

I was wondering if there are other ways to identify a gap in the literature?  

Use quantitative and experimental methods to generate and test hypothetical-deductive generalizations.

Use qualitative and naturalistic approaches to inductively and holistically understand human experience and constructed meanings in context-specific settings, which requires in-depth information-rich cases.