empirical research vs conceptual research

Home » Education » Difference Between Conceptual and Empirical Research

Difference Between Conceptual and Empirical Research

The main difference between conceptual and empirical research is that conceptual research involves abstract ideas and concepts, whereas empirical research involves research based on observation, experiments and verifiable evidence.

Conceptual research and empirical research are two ways of doing scientific research. These are two opposing types of research frameworks since conceptual research doesn’t involve any experiments and empirical research does.

Key Areas Covered

1. What is Empirical Research     – Definition, Characteristics, Uses 2. What is Empirical Research     – Definition, Characteristics, Uses 3. What is the Difference Between Conceptual and Empirical Research     – Comparison of Key Differences

Conceptual Research, Empirical Research, Research

What is Conceptual Research?

Conceptual research is a type of research that is generally related to abstract ideas or concepts. It doesn’t particularly involve any practical experimentation. However, this type of research typically involves observing and analyzing information already present on a given topic. Philosophical research is a generally good example for conceptual research.

Conceptual research can be used to solve real-world problems. Conceptual frameworks, which are analytical tools researchers use in their studies, are based on conceptual research. Furthermore, these frameworks help to make conceptual distinctions and organize ideas researchers need for research purposes.

Figure 2: Conceptual Framework

In simple words, a conceptual framework is the researcher’s synthesis of the literature (previous research studies) on how to explain a particular phenomenon. It explains the actions required in the course of the study based on the researcher’s observations on the subject of research as well as the knowledge gathered from previous studies.

What is Empirical Research?

Empirical research is basically a research that uses empirical evidence. Empirical evidence refers to evidence verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. Thus, empirical research is research studies with conclusions based on empirical evidence. Moreover, empirical research studies are observable and measurable.

Empirical evidence can be gathered through qualitative research studies or quantitative research studies . Qualitative research methods gather non-numerical or non-statistical data. Thus, this type of studies helps to understand the underlying reasons, opinions, and motivations behind something as well as to uncover trends in thought and opinions. Quantitative research studies, on the other hand, gather statistical data. These have the ability to quantify behaviours, opinions, or other defined variables. Moreover, a researcher can even use a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to find answers to his research questions .

Figure 2: Empirical Research Cycle

A.D. de Groot, a famous psychologist, came up with a cycle (figure 2) to explain the process of the empirical research process. Moreover, this cycle has five steps, each as important as the other. These steps include observation, induction, deduction, testing and evaluation.

Conceptual research is a type of research that is generally related to abstract ideas or concepts whereas empirical research is any research study where conclusions of the study are drawn from evidence verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.

Conceptual research involves abstract idea and concepts; however, it doesn’t involve any practical experiments. Empirical research, on the other hand, involves phenomena that are observable and measurable.

Type of Studies

Philosophical research studies are examples of conceptual research studies, whereas empirical research includes both quantitative and qualitative studies.

The main difference between conceptual and empirical research is that conceptual research involves abstract ideas and concepts whereas empirical research involves research based on observation, experiments and verifiable evidence.

1.“Empirical Research: Definition, Methods, Types and Examples.” QuestionPro, 14 Dec. 2018, Available here . 2. “Empirical Research.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 15 Sept. 2019, Available here . 3.“Conceptual Research: Definition, Framework, Example and Advantages.” QuestionPro, 18 Sept. 2018, Available here. 4. Patrick. “Conceptual Framework: A Step-by-Step Guide on How to Make One.” SimplyEducate.Me, 4 Dec. 2018, Available here .

Image Courtesy:

1. “APM Conceptual Framework” By LarryDragich – Created for a Technical Management Counsel meeting Previously published: First published in APM Digest in March (CC BY-SA 3.0) via Commons Wikimedia 2. “Empirical Cycle” By Empirical_Cycle.png: TesseUndDaanderivative work: Beao (talk) – Empirical_Cycle.png (CC BY 3.0) via Commons Wikimedia

About the Author: Hasa

Hasanthi is a seasoned content writer and editor with over 8 years of experience. Armed with a BA degree in English and a knack for digital marketing, she explores her passions for literature, history, culture, and food through her engaging and informative writing.

​You May Also Like These

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Conceptual Research vs. Empirical Research: What's the Difference?

Key Differences

Comparison chart, nature of research, data collection, methodology, conceptual research and empirical research definitions, conceptual research, empirical research, what methods are used in empirical research, is conceptual research important, what are examples of conceptual research, how is empirical research different from conceptual research, how does empirical research validate theories, what's a key characteristic of empirical research, can conceptual research include data collection, is empirical research always quantitative, how does conceptual research contribute to academia, what is conceptual research, can conceptual research lead to practical applications, are surveys considered empirical research, what fields commonly use empirical research, do empirical studies always confirm theories, can a study combine conceptual and empirical research, how does one validate results in conceptual research, can conceptual research be subjective, what role do case studies play in empirical research, what is a hypothesis in empirical research, is literature review a part of conceptual research.

Trending Comparisons

Popular Comparisons

New Comparisons

• Conduct , Resources

Conceptual Research Vs Empirical Research?

Conceptual research.

Conceptual research is a technique wherein investigation is conducted by watching and analyzing already present data on a given point. Conceptual research does not include any viable tests. It is related to unique concepts or thoughts. Philosophers have long utilized conceptual research to create modern speculations or decipher existing hypotheses in a diverse light.

It doesn’t include viable experimentation, but the instep depends on analyzing accessible data on a given theme. Conceptual research has been broadly utilized within logic to create modern hypotheses, counter existing speculations, or distinctively decipher existing hypotheses. 

Today, conceptual research is utilized to answer business questions and fathom real-world problems. Researchers utilize explanatory apparatuses called conceptual systems to form conceptual refinements and organize thoughts required for investigation purposes.

Conceptual Research Framework

A conceptual research framework is built utilizing existing writing and studies from which inferences can be drawn. A conceptual research system constitutes a researcher’s combination of past research and related work and clarifies the phenomenon. The study is conducted to diminish the existing information gap on a specific theme and make important and dependable data available. 

The following steps can be taken to make a conceptual research framework:

Explain a topic for research

The primary step is to characterize the subject of your research. Most analysts will choose a topic relating to their field of expertise.

Collect and Organize relevant research

As conceptual research depends on pre-existing studies and writing, analysts must collect all important data relating to their point. It’s imperative to utilize dependable sources and information from scientific journals or investigate well-presumed papers. As conceptual research does not utilize experimentation and tests, the significance of analyzing dependable, fact-based information is reinforced.

Distinguish factors for the research

The other step is to choose important factors for their research. These factors will be the measuring sticks by which inductions will be drawn. They provide modern scope to inquire about and offer to help identify how distinctive factors may influence the subject of research.

Make the Framework 

The last step is to make the research framework by utilizing significant writing, factors, and other significant material. 

Advantages of Conceptual Research

It requires few resources compared to other types of market research where practical experimentation is required. This spares time and assets.

It is helpful as this form of investigation only requires the assessment of existing writing. 

Disadvantages of Conceptual Research

Speculations based on existing writing instead of experimentation and perception draw conclusions that are less fact-based and may not essentially be considered dependable.

Often, we see philosophical hypotheses being countered or changed since their conclusions or inferences are drawn from existing writings instead of practical experimentation. 

Empirical Research:

Empirical research is based on observed and established phenomena and determines information from real involvement instead of hypothesis or conviction. It derives knowledge from actual experiences. How do you know a study is empirical? Pay attention to the subheadings inside the article, book, or report and examine them to seek a depiction of the investigating “strategy.” Inquire yourself: Could I recreate this study and test these results?

Key characteristics to see for: 

• Specific research questions to be answered 
• Definition of the population, behavior, or wonders being studied 
• Description of the methods used to consider the population of the area of phenomena, including various aspects like choice criteria, controls, and testing instruments.

Empirical Research Framework:

Since empirical research is based on perception and capturing experiences, it is critical to arrange the steps to experiment and how to examine it. This will empower the analyst to resolve issues or obstacles amid the test.

• Define your purpose for this research:

This is often the step where the analyst must answer questions like what precisely I need to discover? What is the issue articulation? Are there any issues regarding the accessibility of knowledge, data, time, or assets? Will this research be more useful than what it’ll cost? Before going ahead, an analyst should characterize his reason for the investigation and plan to carry out assist tasks.

• Supporting theories and relevant literature:

The analyst should discover if some hypotheses can be connected to his research issue. He must figure out if any hypothesis can offer assistance in supporting his discoveries. All kinds of significant writing will offer assistance to the analyst to discover if others have researched this before. The analyst will also need to set up presumptions and also discover if there’s any history concerning his investigation issue

• Creation of Hypothesis and measurement:

Before starting the proper research related to his subject, he must give himself a working theory or figure out the probable result. The researcher has to set up factors, choose the environment for the research and find out how he can relate between the variables. The researcher will also need to characterize the units of estimations, tolerable degree for mistakes, and discover in the event that the estimation chosen will be approved by others.

• Methodology and data collection:

In this step, the analyst has to characterize a strategy for conducting his investigation. He must set up tests to gather the information that can empower him to propose the theory. The analyst will choose whether to require a test or non-test strategy for conducting the research. The research design will shift depending on the field in which the research is being conducted. Finally, the analyst will discover parameters that will influence the legitimacy of the research plan. The information collected will need to be done by choosing appropriate tests depending on the inquire-about address. To carry out the inquiry, he can utilize one of the numerous testing strategies. Once information collection is complete, the analyst will have experimental information which must be examined.

• Data Analysis and result:

Data analysis can be tried in two ways, qualitatively and quantitatively. The analyst will need to discover what subjective strategy or quantitative strategy will be required or will require a combination of both. Depending on the examination of his information, he will know if his speculation is backed or rejected. Analyzing this information is the foremost vital portion to bolster his speculation.

A report will need to be made with the discoveries of the research. The analyst can deliver the hypotheses and writing that support his investigation. He can make recommendations or suggestions to assist research on his subject

Advantages of empirical research

• Empirical research points to discover the meaning behind a specific phenomenon. In other words, it looks for answers to how and why something works the way it is. 
• By recognizing why something happens, it is conceivable to imitate or avoid comparative events. 
• The adaptability of the research permits the analysts to alter certain perspectives of the research and alter them to new objectives. 
• It is more dependable since it speaks to a real-life involvement and not fair theories. 
• Data collected through experimental research may be less biased since the analyst is there amid the collection handle. In contrast, it is incomprehensible to confirm the precision of the information in non-empirical research.

Disadvantages of empirical research

• It can be time-consuming depending on the research subject that you have chosen. 
• It isn’t a cost-effective way of information collection in most cases because of the viable costly strategies of information gathering. Additionally, it may require traveling between numerous locations. 
• Lack of proof and research subjects may not surrender the required result. A little test estimate avoids generalization since it may not be enough to speak to the target audience.
• It isn’t easy to induce data on touchy points. Additionally, analysts may require participants’ consent to utilize the data

Difference Between Conceptual and Empirical Research

Conceptual research and empirical research are two ways of doing logical research. These are two restricting investigation systems since conceptual research doesn’t include any tests, and empirical investigation does.

Conceptual research includes unique thoughts and ideas; as it may, it doesn’t include any experiments and tests. Empirical research, on the other hand, includes phenomena that are observable and can be measured.

• Type of Studies:

Philosophical research studies are cases of conceptual research, while empirical research incorporates both quantitative and subjective studies.

The major difference between conceptual and empirical investigation is that conceptual research involves unique thoughts and ideas, though experimental investigation includes investigation based on perception, tests, and unquestionable evidence.

References:

• Empirical Research: Advantages, Drawbacks, and Differences with Non-Empirical Research. In Voicedocs . Retrieved from https://voicedocs.com/en/blog/empirical-research-advantages-drawbacks-and-differences-non-empirical-research
• Empirical Research: Definition, Methods, Types and Examples. In QuestionPro . Retrieved from https://www.questionpro.com/blog/empirical-research/
• Conceptual vs. empirical research: which is better? In Enago Academy . Retrieved from https://www.enago.com/academy/conceptual-vs-empirical-research-which-is-better/

We’ve collected the items for you to purchase for your convenience.

Get the entire package for up to 50% discount with our Replication program.

Our Location

Conduct science.

• Become a Partner
• Social Media
• Career /Academia
• Privacy Policy
• Shipping & Returns
• Request a quote

Customer service

• Account details
• Lost password

DISCLAIMER: ConductScience and affiliate products are NOT designed for human consumption, testing, or clinical utilization. They are designed for pre-clinical utilization only. Customers purchasing apparatus for the purposes of scientific research or veterinary care affirm adherence to applicable regulatory bodies for the country in which their research or care is conducted.

Conceptual vs. Empirical

What's the difference.

Conceptual and empirical are two different approaches used in research and analysis. Conceptual refers to ideas, theories, and concepts that are based on abstract thinking and reasoning. It involves developing a theoretical framework and understanding the relationships between different variables or concepts. On the other hand, empirical refers to the collection and analysis of data through observation or experimentation. It involves gathering real-world evidence and using statistical methods to draw conclusions. While conceptual research focuses on developing theories and understanding concepts, empirical research focuses on testing and validating those theories through data analysis. Both approaches are important in their own ways and often complement each other in research studies.

Further Detail

Introduction.

Conceptual and empirical are two fundamental approaches used in various fields of study, including philosophy, science, and research. While both approaches aim to gain knowledge and understanding, they differ in their methods and sources of information. In this article, we will explore the attributes of conceptual and empirical approaches, highlighting their strengths and limitations.

Conceptual Approach

The conceptual approach primarily relies on abstract ideas, theories, and concepts to understand and explain phenomena. It focuses on the theoretical framework and uses deductive reasoning to draw conclusions. Conceptual analysis involves breaking down complex ideas into simpler components and examining their relationships.

One of the key attributes of the conceptual approach is its flexibility. It allows researchers to explore ideas and concepts that may not be directly observable or measurable. This flexibility enables the development of new theories and frameworks, expanding our understanding of various subjects.

Furthermore, the conceptual approach encourages critical thinking and creativity. Researchers can propose new ideas and challenge existing theories, leading to innovation and advancement in their respective fields. It also allows for the exploration of hypothetical scenarios and thought experiments, which can provide valuable insights.

However, the conceptual approach has its limitations. Since it relies heavily on abstract ideas, it may lack empirical evidence to support its claims. This can lead to subjective interpretations and potential biases. Additionally, the conceptual approach may struggle to provide concrete predictions or practical applications without empirical validation.

Empirical Approach

The empirical approach, on the other hand, emphasizes the collection and analysis of observable data to draw conclusions. It relies on direct observation, experimentation, and measurement to test hypotheses and theories. Empirical research aims to provide objective and verifiable evidence to support or refute claims.

One of the key attributes of the empirical approach is its emphasis on objectivity. By relying on observable data, it aims to minimize biases and subjective interpretations. This allows for the replication of experiments and studies, enhancing the reliability and validity of the findings.

Moreover, the empirical approach provides a solid foundation for evidence-based decision making. It enables researchers to gather data from real-world scenarios and draw conclusions based on actual observations. This practical application makes the empirical approach highly valuable in fields such as medicine, psychology, and social sciences.

However, the empirical approach also has its limitations. It may not capture the full complexity of certain phenomena, as some aspects may be difficult to measure or observe directly. Additionally, empirical research often requires significant resources, time, and effort to collect and analyze data, which can limit the scope and feasibility of certain studies.

Comparing Conceptual and Empirical

While the conceptual and empirical approaches have distinct attributes, they are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they often complement each other in the pursuit of knowledge and understanding.

Conceptual and empirical approaches can be seen as two sides of the same coin. The conceptual approach provides the theoretical framework and ideas, while the empirical approach tests and validates these concepts through observation and measurement.

By combining the strengths of both approaches, researchers can develop comprehensive and robust theories. The conceptual approach allows for the exploration of new ideas and the development of theoretical frameworks, while the empirical approach provides the necessary evidence to support or refute these concepts.

Furthermore, the integration of conceptual and empirical approaches can lead to a more holistic understanding of complex phenomena. The conceptual approach helps researchers identify relevant variables and relationships, guiding the design of empirical studies. The empirical approach, in turn, provides data that can refine and improve conceptual frameworks.

It is important to note that the choice between the conceptual and empirical approaches depends on the research question, the nature of the subject under investigation, and the available resources. Some research questions may require a more theoretical and conceptual analysis, while others may necessitate empirical data collection and experimentation.

Conceptual and empirical approaches are two distinct but interconnected methods used in various fields of study. While the conceptual approach relies on abstract ideas and theories, the empirical approach emphasizes the collection and analysis of observable data. Both approaches have their strengths and limitations, and their integration can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of complex phenomena.

Researchers should carefully consider the attributes of both approaches and choose the most appropriate method based on their research question and objectives. By utilizing the strengths of both conceptual and empirical approaches, researchers can contribute to the advancement of knowledge and make meaningful contributions to their respective fields.

Comparisons may contain inaccurate information about people, places, or facts. Please report any issues.

Empirical Vs. Conceptual Research

According to ORI, research is defined as the process of discovering new knowledge. Using observations and scientific methods, researchers arrive at a hypothesis, test that hypothesis, and make a conclusion based on the key findings. Scientific research can be divided into empirical and conceptual research. However, modern science combines techniques from both types of research.

To know the difference between empirical and conceptual research, click here .

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

Top 4 Tools for Keyword Selection

Keywords play an important role in making research discoverable. It helps researchers discover articles relevant…

Top 4 Tools to Create Scientific Images and Figures

A good image or figure can go a long way in effectively communicating your results…

Tips to Effectively Present Your Work

Presenting your work is an important part of scientific communication and is very important for…

Tips to Tackle Procrastination

You can end up wasting a lot of time procrastinating. Procrastination leads you to a…

Rules of Capitalization

Using too much capitalization or using it incorrectly can undermine, clutter, and confuse your writing…

Sign-up to read more

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

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

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

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

As a researcher, what do you consider most when choosing an image manipulation detector?

A Framework for Undertaking Conceptual and Empirical Research

• First Online: 28 September 2017

Cite this chapter

• Susanne Wiatr Borg 3 &
• Louise Young 3 , 4  

1944 Accesses

1 Citations

Marketing scholars have repeatedly called for more conceptual work. Despite this, the number of conceptual contributions within the discipline of marketing is declining. This chapter argues that one strategy to change this is development of methodological frameworks that can guide and accredit the creation of conceptual scientific knowledge. This chapter offers a framework—the Conceptual and Empirical Research ( CER) model—to guide c onceptual and e mpirical research. The model consists of three embedded layers—ultimate presumptions, abductive logic and research design, which describe and interrelate the processes of conceptual as well as empirical research and show how knowledge creation is an emergent process. A range of conceptual research strategies are proposed that facilitate both the discovery and justification of conceptual insights.

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

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Alderson, Wroe. 1957. Marketing behavior and executive action . Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin.

Google Scholar  

Alvesson, M., and K. Sköldberg. 1994. Tolkning och Reflektion. Vetenskapsfilosofi och Kvalitativ Metod . Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Andersen, I. 2003. Den skinbarlige virkelighed. Gylling, Forlaget Samfundslitteratur.

Andreewsky, E., and Bourcier, D. 2000. Abduction in language interpretation and law making. Kybernetes 29: 836–845.

Arbnor, I., and B. Bjerke. 2009. Methodology for creating business knowledge . London: Sage Publications.

Book   Google Scholar  

Arndt, J. 1985. On making marketing science more scientific: Role of orientations, paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving. Journal of Marketing 49: 11–23.

Article   Google Scholar  

Barker, A., C. Nancarrow, and N. Spackman. 2001. Informed eclecticism: A research paradigm for the twenty-first century. International Journal of Market Research 43: 3–27.

Bateson, G. 1972. Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago.

Blackmore, S. 1999. The meme machine . New York: Oxford University Press.

Bonoma, T.V. 1985. Case research in marketing: Opportunities, problems, and a process. Journal of Marketing Research 199–208.

Booth, W.C., G.G. Colomb, and B.C. Williams. 2003. The craft of research . London: The University of Chicago Press.

Borg, S.W. 2012. Conceptualisations of a relational oriented B2B selling process—and exploring the role of neuro-linguistic programming. Ph.D., University of Southern Denmark.

Brodie, R.J., M. Saren, and J. Pels. 2011. Theorizing about the service dominant logic: The bridging role of middle range theory. Marketing Theory 11 (1): 75–91.

Buttriss, G., and I.F. Wilkinson. 2006. Using narrative sequence methods to advance international entrepreneurship theory. Journal of International Entrepreneurship 4: 157–174.

Chalmers, A.F. 2007. What is this thing called Science? , 3rd ed. St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press.

Cleeren, K., H.J. Van Heerde, and M.G. Dekimpe. 2013. Rising from the ashes: How brands and categories can overcome product-harm crises. Journal of Marketing 77 (2): 58–77.

Danermark, B., M. Ekström, L. Jakobsen, and J.C. Karlsson. 2002. Explaining society critical realism in the social sciences , Routledge.

Darden, L. 1991. Theory change in science . New York: Oxford University Press.

Davis, M.S. 1971. That’s interesting!: Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences , June, 309–344.

Denzin, N.K. 1988. The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Dosi, G. 1988. The nature of the innovative process. In Technical change and economic theory , ed. G. Dosi, Christopher Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, and L.L. Soete. London: Pinter Publishers.

Dubois, A., and L.-E. Gadde. 2002. Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research 55 : 553–560.

Duymedjian, R., and C.C. Rüling. 2010. Towards a foundation of bricolage in organization and management theory. Organization Studies 31 (2): 133–151.

Easton, G. 2002. Marketing: A critical realist approach. Journal of Business Research 55: 103–109.

Elder, L., and R. Paul. 2009. A glossary of critical thinking terms of concepts: The critical analytic vocabulary of the English language. CA, Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Ely, Margot. 1991. Doing qualitative research: Circles within circles , (Vol. 3.). Psychology Press.

Flick, U. 2009. An introduction to qualitative research . London: Sage Publications.

Frazier, Gary L. 1983. On the measurement of interfirm power in channels of distribution. Journal of Marketing Research, 158–166.

Freytag, P.V., and K. Philipsen. 2010. Challenges in relationship marketing . Viborg: Academica.

Gaski, John F. 1984. The theory of power and conflict in channels of distribution. The Journal of Marketing , 9–29.

Gordon, W. 1999. Goodthinking: A guide to qualitative research. London: Admap.

Guba, E.G., and Y.S. Lincoln. 1994. Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Handbook of qualitative research , ed. N.K. Denzin, and Y.S. Lincoln. London: Sage Publications.

Hanson, N.R. 1958. Patterns of discovery . Cambridge, UK: University Press.

Healy, M., and C. Perry. 2000. Comprehensive criteria to judge validity and reliability of qualitative research within the realism paradigm. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal 3: 118–126.

Hunt, S.D. 2011. Theory status, inductive realism, and approximate truth: No miracles, no charades. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 25: 159–178.

Jensen, H.S. 1995. Paradigms of theory-building in business studies. In European research paradigms in business studies , ed. T. Elfring, H.S. Jensen, and A. Money. København: Handelshøjskolens Forlag.

Kauffman, S. 1995. At home in the universe: The search for the laws of self-organization and complexity . New York, USA: Oxford University Press.

Kerin, R.A. 1988. From the editor. Journal of Marketing 52: 1.

Kuhn, T. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kirkeby, O.F. 1990. Abduktion. In Videnskabsteori og metodelære , ed. H. Andersen. Gylling: Samfundslitteratur.

Lundgren, A. 1995. Technological innovation and network evolution. New York, Routledge.

Lvi-Strauss, C. 1966. The savage mind. University of Chicago Press.

MacInnis, D.J. 2004. Where have all the papers gone? Association for Consumer Research Newsletter (Spring): 1–3.

MacInnis, D.J. 2011. A framework for conceptual contributions in marketing. Journal of Marketing 75: 136–154.

Marshall, C., and G. Rossman. 1989. Designing qualitative research. London, Sage.

Maxwell, J.A. 1996. Qualitative research design—An interactive approach . London: Sage Publication.

Mick, D.G., S. Pettigrew, C. Pechmann, and J.L. Ozanne. 2012. Origins, qualities, and envisionments of transformative consumer research. In Transformative consumer research for personal and collective well-being , 3–24.

Parasuraman, Anantharanthan, Valarie A. Zeithaml, and Leonard L. Berry. 1985. A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. The Journal of Marketing , 41–45.

Pike, S., and S.J. Page. 2014. Destination marketing organizations and destination marketing: A narrative analysis of the literature. Tourism Management 41: 202–227.

Punch, K. 1998. Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches . London: Sage.

Ridley, M. 2011. The rational optimist: How prosperity evolves . New York: Harper Collins.

Robson, C. 2009. Real world research . Singapore: Blackwell Publishing.

Rong, B., and I.F. Wilkinson. 2011. What do managers’ survey responses mean and what affects them? The case of market orientation and firm performance. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ) 19 (3): 137–147.

Sartre, J.P. 1974. Between existentialism and Marxism ( www.philpapers.org ).

Saunders, M., P. Lewis, and A. Thornhill. 2009. Research methods for business students . Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Silverman, D. 2010. Doing qualitative research . London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Sheth, J.N. 2011. Impact of emerging markets on marketing: Rethinking existing perspectives and practices. Journal of Marketing 75 (4): 166–182.

Srivastava, Rajendra K., Tasadduq A. Shervani, and Liam Fahey. 1999. Marketing, business processes, and shareholder value: An organizationally embedded view of marketing activities and the discipline of marketing. The Journal of Marketing , 168–179.

Stewart, D.W., and G.M. Zinkhan. 2006. Enhancing marketing theory in academic research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34: 477–480.

Taylor, S.S., D. Fisher, and R.L. Dufresne. 2002. The aesthetics of management storytelling: A key to organizational learning. Management Learning 33: 313–330.

Webster, F.E.J. 2005. Back to the future: Integrating marketing as tactics, strategy, and organizational culture. In Marketing renaissance: Opportunities and imperatives for improving marketing thought, practice, and infrastructure . Journal of Marketing 69: 4–6.

Welch, C., and I. Wilkinson. 2002. Idea logics and network theory in business marketing. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing 9: 27–48.

Wilkinson, I., and L. Young. 2002a. On cooperating: Firms, relationships and networks. Journal of Business Research 55 (2): 123–133.

Wilkinson, I., and L. Young. 2002b. The role of marketing theory in studying marketing. Proceedings : Journal of Macro Marketing Conference , University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Wilkinson, I., and L. Young. 2013. The past and the future of business marketing theory. Industrial Marketing Management 42 (3): 394–404.

Yadav, M.S. 2010. The decline of conceptual articles and implications for knowledge development. Journal of Marketing 74: 1–19.

Young, L., and L. Freeman. 2008. A case for contrast as a catalyst for change. International Journal of Learning 15 (3): 295–304.

Zikmund, W.B., J.C. Babin, and M. Griffin. 2012. Business research methods . Cengage Learning.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark

Susanne Wiatr Borg & Louise Young

Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia

Louise Young

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louise Young .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Per Vagn Freytag

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Borg, S.W., Young, L. (2018). A Framework for Undertaking Conceptual and Empirical Research. In: Freytag, P., Young, L. (eds) Collaborative Research Design. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5008-4_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5008-4_4

Published : 28 September 2017

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-10-5006-0

Online ISBN : 978-981-10-5008-4

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Conceptual Research vs. Empirical Research — What's the Difference?

Difference Between Conceptual Research and Empirical Research

Table of contents, key differences, comparison chart, primary sources, reliance on, contribution to knowledge, compare with definitions, conceptual research, empirical research, common curiosities, what is conceptual research, is empirical research more valid than conceptual research, why is conceptual research important, how does empirical research differ, can empirical research stand alone without conceptual research, are hypotheses always tested in empirical research, can one researcher do both conceptual and empirical research, do all scientific studies use empirical research, which research type is more common in academic journals, which research form is more challenging, can conceptual research lead to empirical research, how is data gathered in empirical research, which research type is quicker, do the humanities prefer conceptual research, is conceptual or empirical research more impactful, share your discovery.

Author Spotlight

Popular Comparisons

Trending Comparisons

New Comparisons

Trending Terms

Add Hero Title

Distinguishing between the conceptual versus the empirical.

Philosophical questions tend to be conceptual in nature. This means that they cannot be answered simply by giving facts or information. A concept is the object of a thought, not something that is present to the senses.

The word “empirical” means “gained through experience.” Scientific experiments and observation give rise to empirical data. Scientific theories that organize the data are conceptual. Historical records or results of sociological or psychological surveys are empirical. Making sense of those records or results requires the use of concepts.

Concepts are not mysterious, and although they are "abstract," we use them all the time to organize our thinking. We literally could not think or communicate without concepts. Some common examples of concepts are "justice," "beauty," and "truth," but also "seven," "blue," or "big."

Empirical questions can be answered by giving facts or information. Examples of empirical questions are: "What is the chemical composition of water?" or: "When did the French Revolution happen?" or: "Which educational system results in the highest literacy rate?”

When we ask a philosophical conceptual question, we are usually inquiring into the nature of something, or asking a question about how something is the way it is. Ancient philosophers such as Plato asked conceptual questions such as "What is justice?" as the basis of philosophy. The statements, "That action is wrong," or, "Knowledge is justified true belief," are conceptual claims.

In papers, you will often be asked to consider concepts, to analyze and unpack the way in which philosophers use them, and perhaps to compare them across texts. For example, you might be asked, “Do animals have rights?” This question asks you to consider what a right is, and whether it is the sort of thing an animal ought to or even could have. It does not ask whether or not there are laws on the books that actually give these rights. It also does not ask for your opinion on this question, but for a reasoned position that draws on philosophical concepts and texts for support.

Distinguishing Between Descriptive Versus Normative Statements

A description is just what you think it is: It describes a situation or what a philosopher might call a state of affairs. For example, “The car is red,” “The river is flowing quickly,” “I’m sad that my juicer is broken,” “Brutus killed Caesar.” A normative statement is a claim about how things ought to be. For example, “Jazz is better than pop music,” “If you want to pass the exam you should study,” “Killing an innocent person is wrong.” The point here is to see that there is a difference between descriptive claims and normative claims. The question of whether normative judgments are anything more than opinion is a question that philosophers debate and discuss. This distinction is sometimes also referred to as the “is/ought” distinction or the “descriptive/prescriptive” distinction. An additional example is below:

• Descriptive Claim - No one knows what happens after death.
• Normative Claim - No one should fear death.

Thought Experiments

A thought experiment is an imagined scenario that is designed to help you think through a problem or idea. Philosophy is not the only discipline that uses them. Famous thought experiments in other disciplines include  Schrodinger’s cat  (quantum physics),  Hilbert’s infinite hotel  (mathematics), and the  prisoner’s dilemma  (game theory, economics). Thought experiments have even found their way into pop-culture; for example, Phillippa Foot’s  trolley problem  was featured in the sitcom, “The Good Place,” and Frank Jackson’s  Mary’s room  thought experiment is discussed in the film  Ex Machina .

Thought experiments can be found in writings dated all the way back to the origin of philosophy in Ancient Greece. For example, in The Republic, Plato asks readers to imagine  a ring, such as the one presented in the myth of Gyges, that makes you invisible , and poses the question: What would you do if you had such a ring? Would you break the law or do things normally considered bad, knowing you could get away with it? The point isn’t to plan for a time when you might actually get such a ring and whether such a ring could actually exist isn’t important. The point is to get you thinking about the nature of justice.

Thought experiments have sometimes been elaborated upon in fantasy (e.g., Gollum’s ring in  The Hobbit  and  The Lord of the Rings  trilogy) 1  and science fiction (e.g.,  Minority Report 2  and  The Matrix 3 ). Thought experiments have even been elaborated upon in more realistic fiction and films (e.g.,  Crimes and Misdemeanors  and  The Departed 4 ). In each case, the story gives us something to think about with regard to the nature of things, such as justice, free will, or even reality itself.

1. This is perhaps the most famous allusion to the ring of Gyges.

2. This film examines questions related to free will, determinism, and justice.

3. This film raises questions concerning the difference between appearance and reality, an issue dating all the way back to Plato and treated in Descartes’ “evil genius” thought experiment. 

4. Both films examine a question posed in Plato’s  Republic  related to the ring of Gyges: Isn’t it best to be a bad person who appears good and worst to be a good person who appears bad? Plato answers no. Still the challenge of how to address the question properly persists and is poignantly explored in both of these films. 

Howe Writing Center

501 E. High Street Oxford, OH 45056

• Online: Miami Online
• Main Operator 513-529-1809
• Office of Admission 513-529-2531
• Vine Hotline 513-529-6400
• Emergency Info https://miamioh.edu/emergency

1601 University Blvd. Hamilton, OH 45011

• Online: E-Campus
• Main Operator 513-785-3000
• Office of Admission 513-785-3111
• Campus Status Line 513-785-3077
• Emergency Info https://miamioh.edu/regionals/emergency

4200 N. University Blvd. Middletown, OH 45042

• Main Operator 513-727-3200
• Office of Admission 513-727-3216
• Campus Status 513-727-3477

7847 VOA Park Dr. (Corner of VOA Park Dr. and Cox Rd.) West Chester, OH 45069

• Main Operator 513-895-8862
• From Middletown 513-217-8862

Chateau de Differdange 1, Impasse du Chateau, L-4524 Differdange Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

• Main Operator 011-352-582222-1
• Email [email protected]
• Website https://miamioh.edu/luxembourg

217-222 MacMillan Hall 501 E. Spring St. Oxford, OH 45056, USA

• Main Operator 513-529-8600

Initiatives

• Miami THRIVE Strategic Plan
• Miami Rise Strategic Plan
• Boldly Creative
• Annual Report
• Moon Shot for Equity
• Miami and Ohio
• Majors, Minors, and Programs
• Inclusive Excellence
• Employment Opportunities
• University Safety and Security
• Parking, Directions, and Maps
• Equal Opportunity
• Consumer Information
• Land Acknowledgement
• Privacy Statement
• Title IX Statement
• Report an Accessibility Issue
• Annual Security and Fire Safety Report
• Report a Problem with this Website
• Policy Library

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• CBE Life Sci Educ
• v.21(3); Fall 2022

Literature Reviews, Theoretical Frameworks, and Conceptual Frameworks: An Introduction for New Biology Education Researchers

Julie a. luft.

† Department of Mathematics, Social Studies, and Science Education, Mary Frances Early College of Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-7124

Sophia Jeong

‡ Department of Teaching & Learning, College of Education & Human Ecology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210

Robert Idsardi

§ Department of Biology, Eastern Washington University, Cheney, WA 99004

Grant Gardner

∥ Department of Biology, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, TN 37132

Associated Data

To frame their work, biology education researchers need to consider the role of literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks as critical elements of the research and writing process. However, these elements can be confusing for scholars new to education research. This Research Methods article is designed to provide an overview of each of these elements and delineate the purpose of each in the educational research process. We describe what biology education researchers should consider as they conduct literature reviews, identify theoretical frameworks, and construct conceptual frameworks. Clarifying these different components of educational research studies can be helpful to new biology education researchers and the biology education research community at large in situating their work in the broader scholarly literature.

INTRODUCTION

Discipline-based education research (DBER) involves the purposeful and situated study of teaching and learning in specific disciplinary areas ( Singer et al. , 2012 ). Studies in DBER are guided by research questions that reflect disciplines’ priorities and worldviews. Researchers can use quantitative data, qualitative data, or both to answer these research questions through a variety of methodological traditions. Across all methodologies, there are different methods associated with planning and conducting educational research studies that include the use of surveys, interviews, observations, artifacts, or instruments. Ensuring the coherence of these elements to the discipline’s perspective also involves situating the work in the broader scholarly literature. The tools for doing this include literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks. However, the purpose and function of each of these elements is often confusing to new education researchers. The goal of this article is to introduce new biology education researchers to these three important elements important in DBER scholarship and the broader educational literature.

The first element we discuss is a review of research (literature reviews), which highlights the need for a specific research question, study problem, or topic of investigation. Literature reviews situate the relevance of the study within a topic and a field. The process may seem familiar to science researchers entering DBER fields, but new researchers may still struggle in conducting the review. Booth et al. (2016b) highlight some of the challenges novice education researchers face when conducting a review of literature. They point out that novice researchers struggle in deciding how to focus the review, determining the scope of articles needed in the review, and knowing how to be critical of the articles in the review. Overcoming these challenges (and others) can help novice researchers construct a sound literature review that can inform the design of the study and help ensure the work makes a contribution to the field.

The second and third highlighted elements are theoretical and conceptual frameworks. These guide biology education research (BER) studies, and may be less familiar to science researchers. These elements are important in shaping the construction of new knowledge. Theoretical frameworks offer a way to explain and interpret the studied phenomenon, while conceptual frameworks clarify assumptions about the studied phenomenon. Despite the importance of these constructs in educational research, biology educational researchers have noted the limited use of theoretical or conceptual frameworks in published work ( DeHaan, 2011 ; Dirks, 2011 ; Lo et al. , 2019 ). In reviewing articles published in CBE—Life Sciences Education ( LSE ) between 2015 and 2019, we found that fewer than 25% of the research articles had a theoretical or conceptual framework (see the Supplemental Information), and at times there was an inconsistent use of theoretical and conceptual frameworks. Clearly, these frameworks are challenging for published biology education researchers, which suggests the importance of providing some initial guidance to new biology education researchers.

Fortunately, educational researchers have increased their explicit use of these frameworks over time, and this is influencing educational research in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. For instance, a quick search for theoretical or conceptual frameworks in the abstracts of articles in Educational Research Complete (a common database for educational research) in STEM fields demonstrates a dramatic change over the last 20 years: from only 778 articles published between 2000 and 2010 to 5703 articles published between 2010 and 2020, a more than sevenfold increase. Greater recognition of the importance of these frameworks is contributing to DBER authors being more explicit about such frameworks in their studies.

Collectively, literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks work to guide methodological decisions and the elucidation of important findings. Each offers a different perspective on the problem of study and is an essential element in all forms of educational research. As new researchers seek to learn about these elements, they will find different resources, a variety of perspectives, and many suggestions about the construction and use of these elements. The wide range of available information can overwhelm the new researcher who just wants to learn the distinction between these elements or how to craft them adequately.

Our goal in writing this paper is not to offer specific advice about how to write these sections in scholarly work. Instead, we wanted to introduce these elements to those who are new to BER and who are interested in better distinguishing one from the other. In this paper, we share the purpose of each element in BER scholarship, along with important points on its construction. We also provide references for additional resources that may be beneficial to better understanding each element. Table 1 summarizes the key distinctions among these elements.

Comparison of literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual reviews

This article is written for the new biology education researcher who is just learning about these different elements or for scientists looking to become more involved in BER. It is a result of our own work as science education and biology education researchers, whether as graduate students and postdoctoral scholars or newly hired and established faculty members. This is the article we wish had been available as we started to learn about these elements or discussed them with new educational researchers in biology.

LITERATURE REVIEWS

Purpose of a literature review.

A literature review is foundational to any research study in education or science. In education, a well-conceptualized and well-executed review provides a summary of the research that has already been done on a specific topic and identifies questions that remain to be answered, thus illustrating the current research project’s potential contribution to the field and the reasoning behind the methodological approach selected for the study ( Maxwell, 2012 ). BER is an evolving disciplinary area that is redefining areas of conceptual emphasis as well as orientations toward teaching and learning (e.g., Labov et al. , 2010 ; American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2011 ; Nehm, 2019 ). As a result, building comprehensive, critical, purposeful, and concise literature reviews can be a challenge for new biology education researchers.

Building Literature Reviews

There are different ways to approach and construct a literature review. Booth et al. (2016a) provide an overview that includes, for example, scoping reviews, which are focused only on notable studies and use a basic method of analysis, and integrative reviews, which are the result of exhaustive literature searches across different genres. Underlying each of these different review processes are attention to the s earch process, a ppraisa l of articles, s ynthesis of the literature, and a nalysis: SALSA ( Booth et al. , 2016a ). This useful acronym can help the researcher focus on the process while building a specific type of review.

However, new educational researchers often have questions about literature reviews that are foundational to SALSA or other approaches. Common questions concern determining which literature pertains to the topic of study or the role of the literature review in the design of the study. This section addresses such questions broadly while providing general guidance for writing a narrative literature review that evaluates the most pertinent studies.

The literature review process should begin before the research is conducted. As Boote and Beile (2005 , p. 3) suggested, researchers should be “scholars before researchers.” They point out that having a good working knowledge of the proposed topic helps illuminate avenues of study. Some subject areas have a deep body of work to read and reflect upon, providing a strong foundation for developing the research question(s). For instance, the teaching and learning of evolution is an area of long-standing interest in the BER community, generating many studies (e.g., Perry et al. , 2008 ; Barnes and Brownell, 2016 ) and reviews of research (e.g., Sickel and Friedrichsen, 2013 ; Ziadie and Andrews, 2018 ). Emerging areas of BER include the affective domain, issues of transfer, and metacognition ( Singer et al. , 2012 ). Many studies in these areas are transdisciplinary and not always specific to biology education (e.g., Rodrigo-Peiris et al. , 2018 ; Kolpikova et al. , 2019 ). These newer areas may require reading outside BER; fortunately, summaries of some of these topics can be found in the Current Insights section of the LSE website.

In focusing on a specific problem within a broader research strand, a new researcher will likely need to examine research outside BER. Depending upon the area of study, the expanded reading list might involve a mix of BER, DBER, and educational research studies. Determining the scope of the reading is not always straightforward. A simple way to focus one’s reading is to create a “summary phrase” or “research nugget,” which is a very brief descriptive statement about the study. It should focus on the essence of the study, for example, “first-year nonmajor students’ understanding of evolution,” “metacognitive prompts to enhance learning during biochemistry,” or “instructors’ inquiry-based instructional practices after professional development programming.” This type of phrase should help a new researcher identify two or more areas to review that pertain to the study. Focusing on recent research in the last 5 years is a good first step. Additional studies can be identified by reading relevant works referenced in those articles. It is also important to read seminal studies that are more than 5 years old. Reading a range of studies should give the researcher the necessary command of the subject in order to suggest a research question.

Given that the research question(s) arise from the literature review, the review should also substantiate the selected methodological approach. The review and research question(s) guide the researcher in determining how to collect and analyze data. Often the methodological approach used in a study is selected to contribute knowledge that expands upon what has been published previously about the topic (see Institute of Education Sciences and National Science Foundation, 2013 ). An emerging topic of study may need an exploratory approach that allows for a description of the phenomenon and development of a potential theory. This could, but not necessarily, require a methodological approach that uses interviews, observations, surveys, or other instruments. An extensively studied topic may call for the additional understanding of specific factors or variables; this type of study would be well suited to a verification or a causal research design. These could entail a methodological approach that uses valid and reliable instruments, observations, or interviews to determine an effect in the studied event. In either of these examples, the researcher(s) may use a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods methodological approach.

Even with a good research question, there is still more reading to be done. The complexity and focus of the research question dictates the depth and breadth of the literature to be examined. Questions that connect multiple topics can require broad literature reviews. For instance, a study that explores the impact of a biology faculty learning community on the inquiry instruction of faculty could have the following review areas: learning communities among biology faculty, inquiry instruction among biology faculty, and inquiry instruction among biology faculty as a result of professional learning. Biology education researchers need to consider whether their literature review requires studies from different disciplines within or outside DBER. For the example given, it would be fruitful to look at research focused on learning communities with faculty in STEM fields or in general education fields that result in instructional change. It is important not to be too narrow or too broad when reading. When the conclusions of articles start to sound similar or no new insights are gained, the researcher likely has a good foundation for a literature review. This level of reading should allow the researcher to demonstrate a mastery in understanding the researched topic, explain the suitability of the proposed research approach, and point to the need for the refined research question(s).

The literature review should include the researcher’s evaluation and critique of the selected studies. A researcher may have a large collection of studies, but not all of the studies will follow standards important in the reporting of empirical work in the social sciences. The American Educational Research Association ( Duran et al. , 2006 ), for example, offers a general discussion about standards for such work: an adequate review of research informing the study, the existence of sound and appropriate data collection and analysis methods, and appropriate conclusions that do not overstep or underexplore the analyzed data. The Institute of Education Sciences and National Science Foundation (2013) also offer Common Guidelines for Education Research and Development that can be used to evaluate collected studies.

Because not all journals adhere to such standards, it is important that a researcher review each study to determine the quality of published research, per the guidelines suggested earlier. In some instances, the research may be fatally flawed. Examples of such flaws include data that do not pertain to the question, a lack of discussion about the data collection, poorly constructed instruments, or an inadequate analysis. These types of errors result in studies that are incomplete, error-laden, or inaccurate and should be excluded from the review. Most studies have limitations, and the author(s) often make them explicit. For instance, there may be an instructor effect, recognized bias in the analysis, or issues with the sample population. Limitations are usually addressed by the research team in some way to ensure a sound and acceptable research process. Occasionally, the limitations associated with the study can be significant and not addressed adequately, which leaves a consequential decision in the hands of the researcher. Providing critiques of studies in the literature review process gives the reader confidence that the researcher has carefully examined relevant work in preparation for the study and, ultimately, the manuscript.

A solid literature review clearly anchors the proposed study in the field and connects the research question(s), the methodological approach, and the discussion. Reviewing extant research leads to research questions that will contribute to what is known in the field. By summarizing what is known, the literature review points to what needs to be known, which in turn guides decisions about methodology. Finally, notable findings of the new study are discussed in reference to those described in the literature review.

Within published BER studies, literature reviews can be placed in different locations in an article. When included in the introductory section of the study, the first few paragraphs of the manuscript set the stage, with the literature review following the opening paragraphs. Cooper et al. (2019) illustrate this approach in their study of course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). An introduction discussing the potential of CURES is followed by an analysis of the existing literature relevant to the design of CUREs that allows for novel student discoveries. Within this review, the authors point out contradictory findings among research on novel student discoveries. This clarifies the need for their study, which is described and highlighted through specific research aims.

A literature reviews can also make up a separate section in a paper. For example, the introduction to Todd et al. (2019) illustrates the need for their research topic by highlighting the potential of learning progressions (LPs) and suggesting that LPs may help mitigate learning loss in genetics. At the end of the introduction, the authors state their specific research questions. The review of literature following this opening section comprises two subsections. One focuses on learning loss in general and examines a variety of studies and meta-analyses from the disciplines of medical education, mathematics, and reading. The second section focuses specifically on LPs in genetics and highlights student learning in the midst of LPs. These separate reviews provide insights into the stated research question.

Suggestions and Advice

A well-conceptualized, comprehensive, and critical literature review reveals the understanding of the topic that the researcher brings to the study. Literature reviews should not be so big that there is no clear area of focus; nor should they be so narrow that no real research question arises. The task for a researcher is to craft an efficient literature review that offers a critical analysis of published work, articulates the need for the study, guides the methodological approach to the topic of study, and provides an adequate foundation for the discussion of the findings.

In our own writing of literature reviews, there are often many drafts. An early draft may seem well suited to the study because the need for and approach to the study are well described. However, as the results of the study are analyzed and findings begin to emerge, the existing literature review may be inadequate and need revision. The need for an expanded discussion about the research area can result in the inclusion of new studies that support the explanation of a potential finding. The literature review may also prove to be too broad. Refocusing on a specific area allows for more contemplation of a finding.

It should be noted that there are different types of literature reviews, and many books and articles have been written about the different ways to embark on these types of reviews. Among these different resources, the following may be helpful in considering how to refine the review process for scholarly journals:

• Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016a). Systemic approaches to a successful literature review (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. This book addresses different types of literature reviews and offers important suggestions pertaining to defining the scope of the literature review and assessing extant studies.
• Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., Williams, J. M., Bizup, J., & Fitzgerald, W. T. (2016b). The craft of research (4th ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. This book can help the novice consider how to make the case for an area of study. While this book is not specifically about literature reviews, it offers suggestions about making the case for your study.
• Galvan, J. L., & Galvan, M. C. (2017). Writing literature reviews: A guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences (7th ed.). Routledge. This book offers guidance on writing different types of literature reviews. For the novice researcher, there are useful suggestions for creating coherent literature reviews.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS

Purpose of theoretical frameworks.

As new education researchers may be less familiar with theoretical frameworks than with literature reviews, this discussion begins with an analogy. Envision a biologist, chemist, and physicist examining together the dramatic effect of a fog tsunami over the ocean. A biologist gazing at this phenomenon may be concerned with the effect of fog on various species. A chemist may be interested in the chemical composition of the fog as water vapor condenses around bits of salt. A physicist may be focused on the refraction of light to make fog appear to be “sitting” above the ocean. While observing the same “objective event,” the scientists are operating under different theoretical frameworks that provide a particular perspective or “lens” for the interpretation of the phenomenon. Each of these scientists brings specialized knowledge, experiences, and values to this phenomenon, and these influence the interpretation of the phenomenon. The scientists’ theoretical frameworks influence how they design and carry out their studies and interpret their data.

Within an educational study, a theoretical framework helps to explain a phenomenon through a particular lens and challenges and extends existing knowledge within the limitations of that lens. Theoretical frameworks are explicitly stated by an educational researcher in the paper’s framework, theory, or relevant literature section. The framework shapes the types of questions asked, guides the method by which data are collected and analyzed, and informs the discussion of the results of the study. It also reveals the researcher’s subjectivities, for example, values, social experience, and viewpoint ( Allen, 2017 ). It is essential that a novice researcher learn to explicitly state a theoretical framework, because all research questions are being asked from the researcher’s implicit or explicit assumptions of a phenomenon of interest ( Schwandt, 2000 ).

Selecting Theoretical Frameworks

Theoretical frameworks are one of the most contemplated elements in our work in educational research. In this section, we share three important considerations for new scholars selecting a theoretical framework.

The first step in identifying a theoretical framework involves reflecting on the phenomenon within the study and the assumptions aligned with the phenomenon. The phenomenon involves the studied event. There are many possibilities, for example, student learning, instructional approach, or group organization. A researcher holds assumptions about how the phenomenon will be effected, influenced, changed, or portrayed. It is ultimately the researcher’s assumption(s) about the phenomenon that aligns with a theoretical framework. An example can help illustrate how a researcher’s reflection on the phenomenon and acknowledgment of assumptions can result in the identification of a theoretical framework.

In our example, a biology education researcher may be interested in exploring how students’ learning of difficult biological concepts can be supported by the interactions of group members. The phenomenon of interest is the interactions among the peers, and the researcher assumes that more knowledgeable students are important in supporting the learning of the group. As a result, the researcher may draw on Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory of learning and development that is focused on the phenomenon of student learning in a social setting. This theory posits the critical nature of interactions among students and between students and teachers in the process of building knowledge. A researcher drawing upon this framework holds the assumption that learning is a dynamic social process involving questions and explanations among students in the classroom and that more knowledgeable peers play an important part in the process of building conceptual knowledge.

It is important to state at this point that there are many different theoretical frameworks. Some frameworks focus on learning and knowing, while other theoretical frameworks focus on equity, empowerment, or discourse. Some frameworks are well articulated, and others are still being refined. For a new researcher, it can be challenging to find a theoretical framework. Two of the best ways to look for theoretical frameworks is through published works that highlight different frameworks.

When a theoretical framework is selected, it should clearly connect to all parts of the study. The framework should augment the study by adding a perspective that provides greater insights into the phenomenon. It should clearly align with the studies described in the literature review. For instance, a framework focused on learning would correspond to research that reported different learning outcomes for similar studies. The methods for data collection and analysis should also correspond to the framework. For instance, a study about instructional interventions could use a theoretical framework concerned with learning and could collect data about the effect of the intervention on what is learned. When the data are analyzed, the theoretical framework should provide added meaning to the findings, and the findings should align with the theoretical framework.

A study by Jensen and Lawson (2011) provides an example of how a theoretical framework connects different parts of the study. They compared undergraduate biology students in heterogeneous and homogeneous groups over the course of a semester. Jensen and Lawson (2011) assumed that learning involved collaboration and more knowledgeable peers, which made Vygotsky’s (1978) theory a good fit for their study. They predicted that students in heterogeneous groups would experience greater improvement in their reasoning abilities and science achievements with much of the learning guided by the more knowledgeable peers.

In the enactment of the study, they collected data about the instruction in traditional and inquiry-oriented classes, while the students worked in homogeneous or heterogeneous groups. To determine the effect of working in groups, the authors also measured students’ reasoning abilities and achievement. Each data-collection and analysis decision connected to understanding the influence of collaborative work.

Their findings highlighted aspects of Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of learning. One finding, for instance, posited that inquiry instruction, as a whole, resulted in reasoning and achievement gains. This links to Vygotsky (1978) , because inquiry instruction involves interactions among group members. A more nuanced finding was that group composition had a conditional effect. Heterogeneous groups performed better with more traditional and didactic instruction, regardless of the reasoning ability of the group members. Homogeneous groups worked better during interaction-rich activities for students with low reasoning ability. The authors attributed the variation to the different types of helping behaviors of students. High-performing students provided the answers, while students with low reasoning ability had to work collectively through the material. In terms of Vygotsky (1978) , this finding provided new insights into the learning context in which productive interactions can occur for students.

Another consideration in the selection and use of a theoretical framework pertains to its orientation to the study. This can result in the theoretical framework prioritizing individuals, institutions, and/or policies ( Anfara and Mertz, 2014 ). Frameworks that connect to individuals, for instance, could contribute to understanding their actions, learning, or knowledge. Institutional frameworks, on the other hand, offer insights into how institutions, organizations, or groups can influence individuals or materials. Policy theories provide ways to understand how national or local policies can dictate an emphasis on outcomes or instructional design. These different types of frameworks highlight different aspects in an educational setting, which influences the design of the study and the collection of data. In addition, these different frameworks offer a way to make sense of the data. Aligning the data collection and analysis with the framework ensures that a study is coherent and can contribute to the field.

New understandings emerge when different theoretical frameworks are used. For instance, Ebert-May et al. (2015) prioritized the individual level within conceptual change theory (see Posner et al. , 1982 ). In this theory, an individual’s knowledge changes when it no longer fits the phenomenon. Ebert-May et al. (2015) designed a professional development program challenging biology postdoctoral scholars’ existing conceptions of teaching. The authors reported that the biology postdoctoral scholars’ teaching practices became more student-centered as they were challenged to explain their instructional decision making. According to the theory, the biology postdoctoral scholars’ dissatisfaction in their descriptions of teaching and learning initiated change in their knowledge and instruction. These results reveal how conceptual change theory can explain the learning of participants and guide the design of professional development programming.

The communities of practice (CoP) theoretical framework ( Lave, 1988 ; Wenger, 1998 ) prioritizes the institutional level , suggesting that learning occurs when individuals learn from and contribute to the communities in which they reside. Grounded in the assumption of community learning, the literature on CoP suggests that, as individuals interact regularly with the other members of their group, they learn about the rules, roles, and goals of the community ( Allee, 2000 ). A study conducted by Gehrke and Kezar (2017) used the CoP framework to understand organizational change by examining the involvement of individual faculty engaged in a cross-institutional CoP focused on changing the instructional practice of faculty at each institution. In the CoP, faculty members were involved in enhancing instructional materials within their department, which aligned with an overarching goal of instituting instruction that embraced active learning. Not surprisingly, Gehrke and Kezar (2017) revealed that faculty who perceived the community culture as important in their work cultivated institutional change. Furthermore, they found that institutional change was sustained when key leaders served as mentors and provided support for faculty, and as faculty themselves developed into leaders. This study reveals the complexity of individual roles in a COP in order to support institutional instructional change.

It is important to explicitly state the theoretical framework used in a study, but elucidating a theoretical framework can be challenging for a new educational researcher. The literature review can help to identify an applicable theoretical framework. Focal areas of the review or central terms often connect to assumptions and assertions associated with the framework that pertain to the phenomenon of interest. Another way to identify a theoretical framework is self-reflection by the researcher on personal beliefs and understandings about the nature of knowledge the researcher brings to the study ( Lysaght, 2011 ). In stating one’s beliefs and understandings related to the study (e.g., students construct their knowledge, instructional materials support learning), an orientation becomes evident that will suggest a particular theoretical framework. Theoretical frameworks are not arbitrary , but purposefully selected.

With experience, a researcher may find expanded roles for theoretical frameworks. Researchers may revise an existing framework that has limited explanatory power, or they may decide there is a need to develop a new theoretical framework. These frameworks can emerge from a current study or the need to explain a phenomenon in a new way. Researchers may also find that multiple theoretical frameworks are necessary to frame and explore a problem, as different frameworks can provide different insights into a problem.

Finally, it is important to recognize that choosing “x” theoretical framework does not necessarily mean a researcher chooses “y” methodology and so on, nor is there a clear-cut, linear process in selecting a theoretical framework for one’s study. In part, the nonlinear process of identifying a theoretical framework is what makes understanding and using theoretical frameworks challenging. For the novice scholar, contemplating and understanding theoretical frameworks is essential. Fortunately, there are articles and books that can help:

• Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. This book provides an overview of theoretical frameworks in general educational research.
• Ding, L. (2019). Theoretical perspectives of quantitative physics education research. Physical Review Physics Education Research , 15 (2), 020101-1–020101-13. This paper illustrates how a DBER field can use theoretical frameworks.
• Nehm, R. (2019). Biology education research: Building integrative frameworks for teaching and learning about living systems. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research , 1 , ar15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0017-6 . This paper articulates the need for studies in BER to explicitly state theoretical frameworks and provides examples of potential studies.
• Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice . Sage. This book also provides an overview of theoretical frameworks, but for both research and evaluation.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS

Purpose of a conceptual framework.

A conceptual framework is a description of the way a researcher understands the factors and/or variables that are involved in the study and their relationships to one another. The purpose of a conceptual framework is to articulate the concepts under study using relevant literature ( Rocco and Plakhotnik, 2009 ) and to clarify the presumed relationships among those concepts ( Rocco and Plakhotnik, 2009 ; Anfara and Mertz, 2014 ). Conceptual frameworks are different from theoretical frameworks in both their breadth and grounding in established findings. Whereas a theoretical framework articulates the lens through which a researcher views the work, the conceptual framework is often more mechanistic and malleable.

Conceptual frameworks are broader, encompassing both established theories (i.e., theoretical frameworks) and the researchers’ own emergent ideas. Emergent ideas, for example, may be rooted in informal and/or unpublished observations from experience. These emergent ideas would not be considered a “theory” if they are not yet tested, supported by systematically collected evidence, and peer reviewed. However, they do still play an important role in the way researchers approach their studies. The conceptual framework allows authors to clearly describe their emergent ideas so that connections among ideas in the study and the significance of the study are apparent to readers.

Constructing Conceptual Frameworks

Including a conceptual framework in a research study is important, but researchers often opt to include either a conceptual or a theoretical framework. Either may be adequate, but both provide greater insight into the research approach. For instance, a research team plans to test a novel component of an existing theory. In their study, they describe the existing theoretical framework that informs their work and then present their own conceptual framework. Within this conceptual framework, specific topics portray emergent ideas that are related to the theory. Describing both frameworks allows readers to better understand the researchers’ assumptions, orientations, and understanding of concepts being investigated. For example, Connolly et al. (2018) included a conceptual framework that described how they applied a theoretical framework of social cognitive career theory (SCCT) to their study on teaching programs for doctoral students. In their conceptual framework, the authors described SCCT, explained how it applied to the investigation, and drew upon results from previous studies to justify the proposed connections between the theory and their emergent ideas.

In some cases, authors may be able to sufficiently describe their conceptualization of the phenomenon under study in an introduction alone, without a separate conceptual framework section. However, incomplete descriptions of how the researchers conceptualize the components of the study may limit the significance of the study by making the research less intelligible to readers. This is especially problematic when studying topics in which researchers use the same terms for different constructs or different terms for similar and overlapping constructs (e.g., inquiry, teacher beliefs, pedagogical content knowledge, or active learning). Authors must describe their conceptualization of a construct if the research is to be understandable and useful.

There are some key areas to consider regarding the inclusion of a conceptual framework in a study. To begin with, it is important to recognize that conceptual frameworks are constructed by the researchers conducting the study ( Rocco and Plakhotnik, 2009 ; Maxwell, 2012 ). This is different from theoretical frameworks that are often taken from established literature. Researchers should bring together ideas from the literature, but they may be influenced by their own experiences as a student and/or instructor, the shared experiences of others, or thought experiments as they construct a description, model, or representation of their understanding of the phenomenon under study. This is an exercise in intellectual organization and clarity that often considers what is learned, known, and experienced. The conceptual framework makes these constructs explicitly visible to readers, who may have different understandings of the phenomenon based on their prior knowledge and experience. There is no single method to go about this intellectual work.

Reeves et al. (2016) is an example of an article that proposed a conceptual framework about graduate teaching assistant professional development evaluation and research. The authors used existing literature to create a novel framework that filled a gap in current research and practice related to the training of graduate teaching assistants. This conceptual framework can guide the systematic collection of data by other researchers because the framework describes the relationships among various factors that influence teaching and learning. The Reeves et al. (2016) conceptual framework may be modified as additional data are collected and analyzed by other researchers. This is not uncommon, as conceptual frameworks can serve as catalysts for concerted research efforts that systematically explore a phenomenon (e.g., Reynolds et al. , 2012 ; Brownell and Kloser, 2015 ).

Sabel et al. (2017) used a conceptual framework in their exploration of how scaffolds, an external factor, interact with internal factors to support student learning. Their conceptual framework integrated principles from two theoretical frameworks, self-regulated learning and metacognition, to illustrate how the research team conceptualized students’ use of scaffolds in their learning ( Figure 1 ). Sabel et al. (2017) created this model using their interpretations of these two frameworks in the context of their teaching.

Conceptual framework from Sabel et al. (2017) .

A conceptual framework should describe the relationship among components of the investigation ( Anfara and Mertz, 2014 ). These relationships should guide the researcher’s methods of approaching the study ( Miles et al. , 2014 ) and inform both the data to be collected and how those data should be analyzed. Explicitly describing the connections among the ideas allows the researcher to justify the importance of the study and the rigor of the research design. Just as importantly, these frameworks help readers understand why certain components of a system were not explored in the study. This is a challenge in education research, which is rooted in complex environments with many variables that are difficult to control.

For example, Sabel et al. (2017) stated: “Scaffolds, such as enhanced answer keys and reflection questions, can help students and instructors bridge the external and internal factors and support learning” (p. 3). They connected the scaffolds in the study to the three dimensions of metacognition and the eventual transformation of existing ideas into new or revised ideas. Their framework provides a rationale for focusing on how students use two different scaffolds, and not on other factors that may influence a student’s success (self-efficacy, use of active learning, exam format, etc.).

In constructing conceptual frameworks, researchers should address needed areas of study and/or contradictions discovered in literature reviews. By attending to these areas, researchers can strengthen their arguments for the importance of a study. For instance, conceptual frameworks can address how the current study will fill gaps in the research, resolve contradictions in existing literature, or suggest a new area of study. While a literature review describes what is known and not known about the phenomenon, the conceptual framework leverages these gaps in describing the current study ( Maxwell, 2012 ). In the example of Sabel et al. (2017) , the authors indicated there was a gap in the literature regarding how scaffolds engage students in metacognition to promote learning in large classes. Their study helps fill that gap by describing how scaffolds can support students in the three dimensions of metacognition: intelligibility, plausibility, and wide applicability. In another example, Lane (2016) integrated research from science identity, the ethic of care, the sense of belonging, and an expertise model of student success to form a conceptual framework that addressed the critiques of other frameworks. In a more recent example, Sbeglia et al. (2021) illustrated how a conceptual framework influences the methodological choices and inferences in studies by educational researchers.

Sometimes researchers draw upon the conceptual frameworks of other researchers. When a researcher’s conceptual framework closely aligns with an existing framework, the discussion may be brief. For example, Ghee et al. (2016) referred to portions of SCCT as their conceptual framework to explain the significance of their work on students’ self-efficacy and career interests. Because the authors’ conceptualization of this phenomenon aligned with a previously described framework, they briefly mentioned the conceptual framework and provided additional citations that provided more detail for the readers.

Within both the BER and the broader DBER communities, conceptual frameworks have been used to describe different constructs. For example, some researchers have used the term “conceptual framework” to describe students’ conceptual understandings of a biological phenomenon. This is distinct from a researcher’s conceptual framework of the educational phenomenon under investigation, which may also need to be explicitly described in the article. Other studies have presented a research logic model or flowchart of the research design as a conceptual framework. These constructions can be quite valuable in helping readers understand the data-collection and analysis process. However, a model depicting the study design does not serve the same role as a conceptual framework. Researchers need to avoid conflating these constructs by differentiating the researchers’ conceptual framework that guides the study from the research design, when applicable.

Explicitly describing conceptual frameworks is essential in depicting the focus of the study. We have found that being explicit in a conceptual framework means using accepted terminology, referencing prior work, and clearly noting connections between terms. This description can also highlight gaps in the literature or suggest potential contributions to the field of study. A well-elucidated conceptual framework can suggest additional studies that may be warranted. This can also spur other researchers to consider how they would approach the examination of a phenomenon and could result in a revised conceptual framework.

It can be challenging to create conceptual frameworks, but they are important. Below are two resources that could be helpful in constructing and presenting conceptual frameworks in educational research:

• Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Chapter 3 in this book describes how to construct conceptual frameworks.
• Ravitch, S. M., & Riggan, M. (2016). Reason & rigor: How conceptual frameworks guide research . Los Angeles, CA: Sage. This book explains how conceptual frameworks guide the research questions, data collection, data analyses, and interpretation of results.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

Literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks are all important in DBER and BER. Robust literature reviews reinforce the importance of a study. Theoretical frameworks connect the study to the base of knowledge in educational theory and specify the researcher’s assumptions. Conceptual frameworks allow researchers to explicitly describe their conceptualization of the relationships among the components of the phenomenon under study. Table 1 provides a general overview of these components in order to assist biology education researchers in thinking about these elements.

It is important to emphasize that these different elements are intertwined. When these elements are aligned and complement one another, the study is coherent, and the study findings contribute to knowledge in the field. When literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks are disconnected from one another, the study suffers. The point of the study is lost, suggested findings are unsupported, or important conclusions are invisible to the researcher. In addition, this misalignment may be costly in terms of time and money.

Conducting a literature review, selecting a theoretical framework, and building a conceptual framework are some of the most difficult elements of a research study. It takes time to understand the relevant research, identify a theoretical framework that provides important insights into the study, and formulate a conceptual framework that organizes the finding. In the research process, there is often a constant back and forth among these elements as the study evolves. With an ongoing refinement of the review of literature, clarification of the theoretical framework, and articulation of a conceptual framework, a sound study can emerge that makes a contribution to the field. This is the goal of BER and education research.

Supplementary Material

• Allee, V. (2000). Knowledge networks and communities of learning . OD Practitioner , 32 ( 4 ), 4–13. [ Google Scholar ]
• Allen, M. (2017). The Sage encyclopedia of communication research methods (Vols. 1–4 ). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. 10.4135/9781483381411 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2011). Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: A call to action . Washington, DC. [ Google Scholar ]
• Anfara, V. A., Mertz, N. T. (2014). Setting the stage . In Anfara, V. A., Mertz, N. T. (eds.), Theoretical frameworks in qualitative research (pp. 1–22). Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barnes, M. E., Brownell, S. E. (2016). Practices and perspectives of college instructors on addressing religious beliefs when teaching evolution . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 15 ( 2 ), ar18. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-11-0243 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boote, D. N., Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation . Educational Researcher , 34 ( 6 ), 3–15. 10.3102/0013189x034006003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Booth, A., Sutton, A., Papaioannou, D. (2016a). Systemic approaches to a successful literature review (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., Williams, J. M., Bizup, J., Fitzgerald, W. T. (2016b). The craft of research (4th ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brownell, S. E., Kloser, M. J. (2015). Toward a conceptual framework for measuring the effectiveness of course-based undergraduate research experiences in undergraduate biology . Studies in Higher Education , 40 ( 3 ), 525–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1004234 [ Google Scholar ]
• Connolly, M. R., Lee, Y. G., Savoy, J. N. (2018). The effects of doctoral teaching development on early-career STEM scholars’ college teaching self-efficacy . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 17 ( 1 ), ar14. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-02-0039 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooper, K. M., Blattman, J. N., Hendrix, T., Brownell, S. E. (2019). The impact of broadly relevant novel discoveries on student project ownership in a traditional lab course turned CURE . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 18 ( 4 ), ar57. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-06-0113 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• DeHaan, R. L. (2011). Education research in the biological sciences: A nine decade review (Paper commissioned by the NAS/NRC Committee on the Status, Contributions, and Future Directions of Discipline Based Education Research) . Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved May 20, 2022, from www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/DBER_Mee ting2_commissioned_papers_page.html [ Google Scholar ]
• Ding, L. (2019). Theoretical perspectives of quantitative physics education research . Physical Review Physics Education Research , 15 ( 2 ), 020101. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dirks, C. (2011). The current status and future direction of biology education research . Paper presented at: Second Committee Meeting on the Status, Contributions, and Future Directions of Discipline-Based Education Research, 18–19 October (Washington, DC). Retrieved May 20, 2022, from http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/BOSE/DBASSE_071087 [ Google Scholar ]
• Duran, R. P., Eisenhart, M. A., Erickson, F. D., Grant, C. A., Green, J. L., Hedges, L. V., Schneider, B. L. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications: American Educational Research Association . Educational Researcher , 35 ( 6 ), 33–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ebert-May, D., Derting, T. L., Henkel, T. P., Middlemis Maher, J., Momsen, J. L., Arnold, B., Passmore, H. A. (2015). Breaking the cycle: Future faculty begin teaching with learner-centered strategies after professional development . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 14 ( 2 ), ar22. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-12-0222 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Galvan, J. L., Galvan, M. C. (2017). Writing literature reviews: A guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences (7th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315229386 [ Google Scholar ]
• Gehrke, S., Kezar, A. (2017). The roles of STEM faculty communities of practice in institutional and departmental reform in higher education . American Educational Research Journal , 54 ( 5 ), 803–833. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831217706736 [ Google Scholar ]
• Ghee, M., Keels, M., Collins, D., Neal-Spence, C., Baker, E. (2016). Fine-tuning summer research programs to promote underrepresented students’ persistence in the STEM pathway . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 15 ( 3 ), ar28. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-0046 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Institute of Education Sciences & National Science Foundation. (2013). Common guidelines for education research and development . Retrieved May 20, 2022, from www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13126/nsf13126.pdf
• Jensen, J. L., Lawson, A. (2011). Effects of collaborative group composition and inquiry instruction on reasoning gains and achievement in undergraduate biology . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 10 ( 1 ), 64–73. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-05-0098 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kolpikova, E. P., Chen, D. C., Doherty, J. H. (2019). Does the format of preclass reading quizzes matter? An evaluation of traditional and gamified, adaptive preclass reading quizzes . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 18 ( 4 ), ar52. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-05-0098 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Labov, J. B., Reid, A. H., Yamamoto, K. R. (2010). Integrated biology and undergraduate science education: A new biology education for the twenty-first century? CBE—Life Sciences Education , 9 ( 1 ), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.09-12-0092 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lane, T. B. (2016). Beyond academic and social integration: Understanding the impact of a STEM enrichment program on the retention and degree attainment of underrepresented students . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 15 ( 3 ), ar39. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-0070 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lo, S. M., Gardner, G. E., Reid, J., Napoleon-Fanis, V., Carroll, P., Smith, E., Sato, B. K. (2019). Prevailing questions and methodologies in biology education research: A longitudinal analysis of research in CBE — Life Sciences Education and at the Society for the Advancement of Biology Education Research . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 18 ( 1 ), ar9. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-08-0164 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lysaght, Z. (2011). Epistemological and paradigmatic ecumenism in “Pasteur’s quadrant:” Tales from doctoral research . In Official Conference Proceedings of the Third Asian Conference on Education in Osaka, Japan . Retrieved May 20, 2022, from http://iafor.org/ace2011_offprint/ACE2011_offprint_0254.pdf
• Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nehm, R. (2019). Biology education research: Building integrative frameworks for teaching and learning about living systems . Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research , 1 , ar15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0017-6 [ Google Scholar ]
• Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice . Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Perry, J., Meir, E., Herron, J. C., Maruca, S., Stal, D. (2008). Evaluating two approaches to helping college students understand evolutionary trees through diagramming tasks . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 7 ( 2 ), 193–201. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.07-01-0007 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change . Science Education , 66 ( 2 ), 211–227. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ravitch, S. M., Riggan, M. (2016). Reason & rigor: How conceptual frameworks guide research . Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reeves, T. D., Marbach-Ad, G., Miller, K. R., Ridgway, J., Gardner, G. E., Schussler, E. E., Wischusen, E. W. (2016). A conceptual framework for graduate teaching assistant professional development evaluation and research . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 15 ( 2 ), es2. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-10-0225 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reynolds, J. A., Thaiss, C., Katkin, W., Thompson, R. J. Jr. (2012). Writing-to-learn in undergraduate science education: A community-based, conceptually driven approach . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 11 ( 1 ), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-08-0064 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rocco, T. S., Plakhotnik, M. S. (2009). Literature reviews, conceptual frameworks, and theoretical frameworks: Terms, functions, and distinctions . Human Resource Development Review , 8 ( 1 ), 120–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484309332617 [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodrigo-Peiris, T., Xiang, L., Cassone, V. M. (2018). A low-intensity, hybrid design between a “traditional” and a “course-based” research experience yields positive outcomes for science undergraduate freshmen and shows potential for large-scale application . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 17 ( 4 ), ar53. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-11-0248 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sabel, J. L., Dauer, J. T., Forbes, C. T. (2017). Introductory biology students’ use of enhanced answer keys and reflection questions to engage in metacognition and enhance understanding . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 16 ( 3 ), ar40. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-10-0298 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sbeglia, G. C., Goodridge, J. A., Gordon, L. H., Nehm, R. H. (2021). Are faculty changing? How reform frameworks, sampling intensities, and instrument measures impact inferences about student-centered teaching practices . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 20 ( 3 ), ar39. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-11-0259 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism . In Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 189–213). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sickel, A. J., Friedrichsen, P. (2013). Examining the evolution education literature with a focus on teachers: Major findings, goals for teacher preparation, and directions for future research . Evolution: Education and Outreach , 6 ( 1 ), 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/1936-6434-6-23 [ Google Scholar ]
• Singer, S. R., Nielsen, N. R., Schweingruber, H. A. (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering . Washington, DC: National Academies Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Todd, A., Romine, W. L., Correa-Menendez, J. (2019). Modeling the transition from a phenotypic to genotypic conceptualization of genetics in a university-level introductory biology context . Research in Science Education , 49 ( 2 ), 569–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9626-2 [ Google Scholar ]
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system . Systems Thinker , 9 ( 5 ), 2–3. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ziadie, M. A., Andrews, T. C. (2018). Moving evolution education forward: A systematic analysis of literature to identify gaps in collective knowledge for teaching . CBE—Life Sciences Education , 17 ( 1 ), ar11. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-08-0190 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Yearly paid plans are up to 65% off for the spring sale. Limited time only! 🌸

• Form Builder
• Survey Maker
• AI Form Generator
• AI Survey Tool
• AI Quiz Maker
• Store Builder
• WordPress Plugin

HubSpot CRM

Google Sheets

Google Analytics

Microsoft Excel

• Popular Forms
• Job Application Form Template
• Rental Application Form Template
• Hotel Accommodation Form Template
• Online Registration Form Template
• Employment Application Form Template
• Application Forms
• Booking Forms
• Consent Forms
• Contact Forms
• Donation Forms
• Customer Satisfaction Surveys
• Employee Satisfaction Surveys
• Evaluation Surveys
• Feedback Surveys
• Market Research Surveys
• Personality Quiz Template
• Geography Quiz Template
• Math Quiz Template
• Science Quiz Template
• Vocabulary Quiz Template

Try without registration Quick Start

Read engaging stories, how-to guides, learn about forms.app features.

Inspirational ready-to-use templates for getting started fast and powerful.

Spot-on guides on how to use forms.app and make the most out of it.

See the technical measures we take and learn how we keep your data safe and secure.

• Integrations
• Help Center
• Sign In Sign Up Free
• What is conceptual research: Definition & examples

Defne Çobanoğlu

How did Newton figure out the gravity after seeing an apple fall from a tree? What kind of research did Nicolaus Copernicus conduct to figure out that the planets revolve around the sun and not vice versa? It is certain that they did not conduct practical experiments to figure this stuff out.

The type of research these two scientists do is called conceptual research. They basically observed their surroundings to conceptualize and develop theories about gravitation, motion, and astronomy. That is what some scientists and philosophers do to wrap their heads around existing concepts and new ideas. Now, let us see what exactly conceptual research is and other details.

• What is conceptual research?

Conceptual research is a type of research that does not involve conducting any practical experiments . It is based on observing and analyzing already existing concepts and theories. The researcher can observe their surroundings and develop brand-new theories, or they can build on existing ones.

Conceptual research is widely used in the study of philosophy to develop new ideas. And this type of research is also used to answer business questions and organize ideas, or interpret existing theories differently.

Conceptual research definition

• Conceptual research frameworks

Even if the researcher is not conducting any experiments of their own, they should still work in a systematic manner, to be precise. And a conceptual research framework is built around existing literature and appropriate research studies that can explain the phenomenon. Here is a step-by-step guide to creating a conceptual research framework:

The steps for a conceptual research framework

1 - Define a topic for research:

The first step in creating your research framework is to choose the topic you will be working on. Most researchers define a topic in their area of expertise and go along with it.

2 - Collect relevant literature:

After deciding on the subject, the next and most important step is collecting relevant literature. As this type of research heavily relies on existing literature, it is important to find reliable sources. Successfully collecting relevant information is key to successfully completing this step. The reliable sources one can use are:

• scientific journals
• research papers (published by well-known scientists)
• Public libraries
• Online databases
• Relevant books

3 - Identify specific variables:

In this step, identify specific variables that may affect your research. These variables may give your study a new scope and a new area to cover during your research. For example, let us say you want to conduct research about the occurrence of depression in teenage boys aged 14 to 19. Here, the two variables are teenage boys and depression.

During your research, you figure that substance abuse among teenage boys has a big effect on their mental wellbeings. Therefore, you add substance abuse as a relevant variable and be mindful of that when you are continuing your research. 

4 - Create the framework:

The final step is creating the framework after going through all the relevant data available. The research question in hand becomes the research framework

• Conceptual research examples

When a researcher decides on the subject they want to explore, the next thing they should decide is what kind of methods they want to do. They can choose the experiments and surveys, but sometimes these methods are not possible for different reasons. And when they can not do practical experimenting, they can use existing literature and observation. Here are two examples where conceptual research can be used: 

• Example 1 of conceptual research:

A researcher wants to explore the key factors that influence consumer behavior in the online shopping environment. That is their research question. Once the researcher decides on the subject, they can begin by reviewing the existing literature on consumer behavior and examining different theories and models of consumer behavior. 

Then, they can identify common themes or factors that have emerged. By understanding this phenomenon, the researcher can develop a conceptual framework.

• Example 2 of conceptual research:

A group of researchers wants to see if there is any correlation between chemically dyeing your hair and the risk of cancer in women. They can start collecting data on women that had cancer and usage of hair dye. They can collect research papers on this particular subject. And they can create a conceptual framework with the information they collected and analyzed.

• Advantages and disadvantages of conceptual research

There are multiple research types for researchers to get to the goal they want, and they all offer different advantages. It is up to the researchers to decide on the most suitable one for their study and go along with that. The conceptual study also has its positive and negative aspects one should have in mind. Now, let us go through the list of conceptual research advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages vs. disadvantages of conceptual research

Advantages of conceptual research:

• Requires fewer sources: This type of research does not involve any type of experiment. Therefore it saves money, energy, and manpower. It only involves theorizing and searching through existing literature. 
• Generates new ideas:  Conceptual research can help generate new ideas and hypotheses. Researchers can use data collection to add on top of abstract ideas or concepts
• Helps to identify patterns: Conceptual research can help identify patterns in complex concepts and help develop a conceptual analysis. This can lead to a better understanding of how different factors are related to each other.

Disadvantages of conceptual research:

• Questionable reliability and validity: Conclusions drawn from literature reviews on conceptual research topics are less fact-based and may not essentially be considered dependable. Because they are not backed up by practical experimentation, they may have less credibility.
• May be prone to subjectivity: Because it relies on abstract concepts, conceptual research may be influenced by personal biases and perspectives. Researchers should be mindful of this effect and act on it accordingly.
• Can be time-consuming:  As conceptual research involves extensive research and analyses of relevant literature, it may take a longer time to finalize the study on hand. This can be challenging for researchers who are working within time constraints.
• Conceptual research vs. empirical research

Conceptual research is about creating an idea after looking at existing data or adding on a theory after going through available literature. And the empirical research includes something different than the prior one. Empirical research involves research based on observation, experiments, and verifiable evidence .

The main difference between the two is the fact that empirical research involves doing experiments to develop a conceptual framework. Empirical research studies are observable and measurable as they are verifiable by observations or experience. In order to see if a study is empirical, you can ask yourself this question: Can I create this study and test these results myself?

The difference between conceptual research and empirical research

• Wrapping it up

Once you encounter a problem you want to solve but you are unable to do experiments, you can go with conceptual research. Instead of conducting experiments, you should find appropriate existing literature and analyze them thoroughly. Just then, you can create a conceptual framework.

And you can always use the help of a good online tool for your needs when doing research. The best tool for all your needs, from forms to surveys to questionnaires, is forms.app. forms.app is an online survey maker that offers more than 1000 ready-to-use templates and can be the help you need!

Defne is a content writer at forms.app. She is also a translator specializing in literary translation. Defne loves reading, writing, and translating professionally and as a hobby. Her expertise lies in survey research, research methodologies, content writing, and translation.

• Form Features
• Data Collection

Table of Contents

Related posts.

21+ eye-opening webinar survey questions to get valuable feedback

Şeyma Beyazçiçek

Best 360 degree feedback questions to use in your surveys

The top 17 alternatives to 123FormBuilder

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research

Empirical Research: Definition, Methods, Types and Examples

Content Index

Empirical research: Definition

Empirical research: origin, quantitative research methods, qualitative research methods, steps for conducting empirical research, empirical research methodology cycle, advantages of empirical research, disadvantages of empirical research, why is there a need for empirical research.

Empirical research is defined as any research where conclusions of the study is strictly drawn from concretely empirical evidence, and therefore “verifiable” evidence.

This empirical evidence can be gathered using quantitative market research and  qualitative market research  methods.

For example: A research is being conducted to find out if listening to happy music in the workplace while working may promote creativity? An experiment is conducted by using a music website survey on a set of audience who are exposed to happy music and another set who are not listening to music at all, and the subjects are then observed. The results derived from such a research will give empirical evidence if it does promote creativity or not.

LEARN ABOUT: Behavioral Research

You must have heard the quote” I will not believe it unless I see it”. This came from the ancient empiricists, a fundamental understanding that powered the emergence of medieval science during the renaissance period and laid the foundation of modern science, as we know it today. The word itself has its roots in greek. It is derived from the greek word empeirikos which means “experienced”.

In today’s world, the word empirical refers to collection of data using evidence that is collected through observation or experience or by using calibrated scientific instruments. All of the above origins have one thing in common which is dependence of observation and experiments to collect data and test them to come up with conclusions.

LEARN ABOUT: Causal Research

Types and methodologies of empirical research

Empirical research can be conducted and analysed using qualitative or quantitative methods.

• Quantitative research : Quantitative research methods are used to gather information through numerical data. It is used to quantify opinions, behaviors or other defined variables . These are predetermined and are in a more structured format. Some of the commonly used methods are survey, longitudinal studies, polls, etc
• Qualitative research:   Qualitative research methods are used to gather non numerical data.  It is used to find meanings, opinions, or the underlying reasons from its subjects. These methods are unstructured or semi structured. The sample size for such a research is usually small and it is a conversational type of method to provide more insight or in-depth information about the problem Some of the most popular forms of methods are focus groups, experiments, interviews, etc.

Data collected from these will need to be analysed. Empirical evidence can also be analysed either quantitatively and qualitatively. Using this, the researcher can answer empirical questions which have to be clearly defined and answerable with the findings he has got. The type of research design used will vary depending on the field in which it is going to be used. Many of them might choose to do a collective research involving quantitative and qualitative method to better answer questions which cannot be studied in a laboratory setting.

LEARN ABOUT: Qualitative Research Questions and Questionnaires

Quantitative research methods aid in analyzing the empirical evidence gathered. By using these a researcher can find out if his hypothesis is supported or not.

• Survey research: Survey research generally involves a large audience to collect a large amount of data. This is a quantitative method having a predetermined set of closed questions which are pretty easy to answer. Because of the simplicity of such a method, high responses are achieved. It is one of the most commonly used methods for all kinds of research in today’s world.

Previously, surveys were taken face to face only with maybe a recorder. However, with advancement in technology and for ease, new mediums such as emails , or social media have emerged.

For example: Depletion of energy resources is a growing concern and hence there is a need for awareness about renewable energy. According to recent studies, fossil fuels still account for around 80% of energy consumption in the United States. Even though there is a rise in the use of green energy every year, there are certain parameters because of which the general population is still not opting for green energy. In order to understand why, a survey can be conducted to gather opinions of the general population about green energy and the factors that influence their choice of switching to renewable energy. Such a survey can help institutions or governing bodies to promote appropriate awareness and incentive schemes to push the use of greener energy.

Learn more: Renewable Energy Survey Template Descriptive Research vs Correlational Research

• Experimental research: In experimental research , an experiment is set up and a hypothesis is tested by creating a situation in which one of the variable is manipulated. This is also used to check cause and effect. It is tested to see what happens to the independent variable if the other one is removed or altered. The process for such a method is usually proposing a hypothesis, experimenting on it, analyzing the findings and reporting the findings to understand if it supports the theory or not.

For example: A particular product company is trying to find what is the reason for them to not be able to capture the market. So the organisation makes changes in each one of the processes like manufacturing, marketing, sales and operations. Through the experiment they understand that sales training directly impacts the market coverage for their product. If the person is trained well, then the product will have better coverage.

• Correlational research: Correlational research is used to find relation between two set of variables . Regression analysis is generally used to predict outcomes of such a method. It can be positive, negative or neutral correlation.

LEARN ABOUT: Level of Analysis

For example: Higher educated individuals will get higher paying jobs. This means higher education enables the individual to high paying job and less education will lead to lower paying jobs.

• Longitudinal study: Longitudinal study is used to understand the traits or behavior of a subject under observation after repeatedly testing the subject over a period of time. Data collected from such a method can be qualitative or quantitative in nature.

For example: A research to find out benefits of exercise. The target is asked to exercise everyday for a particular period of time and the results show higher endurance, stamina, and muscle growth. This supports the fact that exercise benefits an individual body.

• Cross sectional: Cross sectional study is an observational type of method, in which a set of audience is observed at a given point in time. In this type, the set of people are chosen in a fashion which depicts similarity in all the variables except the one which is being researched. This type does not enable the researcher to establish a cause and effect relationship as it is not observed for a continuous time period. It is majorly used by healthcare sector or the retail industry.

For example: A medical study to find the prevalence of under-nutrition disorders in kids of a given population. This will involve looking at a wide range of parameters like age, ethnicity, location, incomes  and social backgrounds. If a significant number of kids coming from poor families show under-nutrition disorders, the researcher can further investigate into it. Usually a cross sectional study is followed by a longitudinal study to find out the exact reason.

• Causal-Comparative research : This method is based on comparison. It is mainly used to find out cause-effect relationship between two variables or even multiple variables.

For example: A researcher measured the productivity of employees in a company which gave breaks to the employees during work and compared that to the employees of the company which did not give breaks at all.

LEARN ABOUT: Action Research

Some research questions need to be analysed qualitatively, as quantitative methods are not applicable there. In many cases, in-depth information is needed or a researcher may need to observe a target audience behavior, hence the results needed are in a descriptive analysis form. Qualitative research results will be descriptive rather than predictive. It enables the researcher to build or support theories for future potential quantitative research. In such a situation qualitative research methods are used to derive a conclusion to support the theory or hypothesis being studied.

LEARN ABOUT: Qualitative Interview

• Case study: Case study method is used to find more information through carefully analyzing existing cases. It is very often used for business research or to gather empirical evidence for investigation purpose. It is a method to investigate a problem within its real life context through existing cases. The researcher has to carefully analyse making sure the parameter and variables in the existing case are the same as to the case that is being investigated. Using the findings from the case study, conclusions can be drawn regarding the topic that is being studied.

For example: A report mentioning the solution provided by a company to its client. The challenges they faced during initiation and deployment, the findings of the case and solutions they offered for the problems. Such case studies are used by most companies as it forms an empirical evidence for the company to promote in order to get more business.

• Observational method:   Observational method is a process to observe and gather data from its target. Since it is a qualitative method it is time consuming and very personal. It can be said that observational research method is a part of ethnographic research which is also used to gather empirical evidence. This is usually a qualitative form of research, however in some cases it can be quantitative as well depending on what is being studied.

For example: setting up a research to observe a particular animal in the rain-forests of amazon. Such a research usually take a lot of time as observation has to be done for a set amount of time to study patterns or behavior of the subject. Another example used widely nowadays is to observe people shopping in a mall to figure out buying behavior of consumers.

• One-on-one interview: Such a method is purely qualitative and one of the most widely used. The reason being it enables a researcher get precise meaningful data if the right questions are asked. It is a conversational method where in-depth data can be gathered depending on where the conversation leads.

For example: A one-on-one interview with the finance minister to gather data on financial policies of the country and its implications on the public.

• Focus groups: Focus groups are used when a researcher wants to find answers to why, what and how questions. A small group is generally chosen for such a method and it is not necessary to interact with the group in person. A moderator is generally needed in case the group is being addressed in person. This is widely used by product companies to collect data about their brands and the product.

For example: A mobile phone manufacturer wanting to have a feedback on the dimensions of one of their models which is yet to be launched. Such studies help the company meet the demand of the customer and position their model appropriately in the market.

• Text analysis: Text analysis method is a little new compared to the other types. Such a method is used to analyse social life by going through images or words used by the individual. In today’s world, with social media playing a major part of everyone’s life, such a method enables the research to follow the pattern that relates to his study.

For example: A lot of companies ask for feedback from the customer in detail mentioning how satisfied are they with their customer support team. Such data enables the researcher to take appropriate decisions to make their support team better.

Sometimes a combination of the methods is also needed for some questions that cannot be answered using only one type of method especially when a researcher needs to gain a complete understanding of complex subject matter.

We recently published a blog that talks about examples of qualitative data in education ; why don’t you check it out for more ideas?

Since empirical research is based on observation and capturing experiences, it is important to plan the steps to conduct the experiment and how to analyse it. This will enable the researcher to resolve problems or obstacles which can occur during the experiment.

Step #1: Define the purpose of the research

This is the step where the researcher has to answer questions like what exactly do I want to find out? What is the problem statement? Are there any issues in terms of the availability of knowledge, data, time or resources. Will this research be more beneficial than what it will cost.

Before going ahead, a researcher has to clearly define his purpose for the research and set up a plan to carry out further tasks.

Step #2 : Supporting theories and relevant literature

The researcher needs to find out if there are theories which can be linked to his research problem . He has to figure out if any theory can help him support his findings. All kind of relevant literature will help the researcher to find if there are others who have researched this before, or what are the problems faced during this research. The researcher will also have to set up assumptions and also find out if there is any history regarding his research problem

Step #3: Creation of Hypothesis and measurement

Before beginning the actual research he needs to provide himself a working hypothesis or guess what will be the probable result. Researcher has to set up variables, decide the environment for the research and find out how can he relate between the variables.

Researcher will also need to define the units of measurements, tolerable degree for errors, and find out if the measurement chosen will be acceptable by others.

Step #4: Methodology, research design and data collection

In this step, the researcher has to define a strategy for conducting his research. He has to set up experiments to collect data which will enable him to propose the hypothesis. The researcher will decide whether he will need experimental or non experimental method for conducting the research. The type of research design will vary depending on the field in which the research is being conducted. Last but not the least, the researcher will have to find out parameters that will affect the validity of the research design. Data collection will need to be done by choosing appropriate samples depending on the research question. To carry out the research, he can use one of the many sampling techniques. Once data collection is complete, researcher will have empirical data which needs to be analysed.

LEARN ABOUT: Best Data Collection Tools

Step #5: Data Analysis and result

Data analysis can be done in two ways, qualitatively and quantitatively. Researcher will need to find out what qualitative method or quantitative method will be needed or will he need a combination of both. Depending on the unit of analysis of his data, he will know if his hypothesis is supported or rejected. Analyzing this data is the most important part to support his hypothesis.

Step #6: Conclusion

A report will need to be made with the findings of the research. The researcher can give the theories and literature that support his research. He can make suggestions or recommendations for further research on his topic.

A.D. de Groot, a famous dutch psychologist and a chess expert conducted some of the most notable experiments using chess in the 1940’s. During his study, he came up with a cycle which is consistent and now widely used to conduct empirical research. It consists of 5 phases with each phase being as important as the next one. The empirical cycle captures the process of coming up with hypothesis about how certain subjects work or behave and then testing these hypothesis against empirical data in a systematic and rigorous approach. It can be said that it characterizes the deductive approach to science. Following is the empirical cycle.

• Observation: At this phase an idea is sparked for proposing a hypothesis. During this phase empirical data is gathered using observation. For example: a particular species of flower bloom in a different color only during a specific season.
• Induction: Inductive reasoning is then carried out to form a general conclusion from the data gathered through observation. For example: As stated above it is observed that the species of flower blooms in a different color during a specific season. A researcher may ask a question “does the temperature in the season cause the color change in the flower?” He can assume that is the case, however it is a mere conjecture and hence an experiment needs to be set up to support this hypothesis. So he tags a few set of flowers kept at a different temperature and observes if they still change the color?
• Deduction: This phase helps the researcher to deduce a conclusion out of his experiment. This has to be based on logic and rationality to come up with specific unbiased results.For example: In the experiment, if the tagged flowers in a different temperature environment do not change the color then it can be concluded that temperature plays a role in changing the color of the bloom.
• Testing: This phase involves the researcher to return to empirical methods to put his hypothesis to the test. The researcher now needs to make sense of his data and hence needs to use statistical analysis plans to determine the temperature and bloom color relationship. If the researcher finds out that most flowers bloom a different color when exposed to the certain temperature and the others do not when the temperature is different, he has found support to his hypothesis. Please note this not proof but just a support to his hypothesis.
• Evaluation: This phase is generally forgotten by most but is an important one to keep gaining knowledge. During this phase the researcher puts forth the data he has collected, the support argument and his conclusion. The researcher also states the limitations for the experiment and his hypothesis and suggests tips for others to pick it up and continue a more in-depth research for others in the future. LEARN MORE: Population vs Sample

LEARN MORE: Population vs Sample

There is a reason why empirical research is one of the most widely used method. There are a few advantages associated with it. Following are a few of them.

• It is used to authenticate traditional research through various experiments and observations.
• This research methodology makes the research being conducted more competent and authentic.
• It enables a researcher understand the dynamic changes that can happen and change his strategy accordingly.
• The level of control in such a research is high so the researcher can control multiple variables.
• It plays a vital role in increasing internal validity .

Even though empirical research makes the research more competent and authentic, it does have a few disadvantages. Following are a few of them.

• Such a research needs patience as it can be very time consuming. The researcher has to collect data from multiple sources and the parameters involved are quite a few, which will lead to a time consuming research.
• Most of the time, a researcher will need to conduct research at different locations or in different environments, this can lead to an expensive affair.
• There are a few rules in which experiments can be performed and hence permissions are needed. Many a times, it is very difficult to get certain permissions to carry out different methods of this research.
• Collection of data can be a problem sometimes, as it has to be collected from a variety of sources through different methods.

LEARN ABOUT:  Social Communication Questionnaire

Empirical research is important in today’s world because most people believe in something only that they can see, hear or experience. It is used to validate multiple hypothesis and increase human knowledge and continue doing it to keep advancing in various fields.

For example: Pharmaceutical companies use empirical research to try out a specific drug on controlled groups or random groups to study the effect and cause. This way, they prove certain theories they had proposed for the specific drug. Such research is very important as sometimes it can lead to finding a cure for a disease that has existed for many years. It is useful in science and many other fields like history, social sciences, business, etc.

LEARN ABOUT: 12 Best Tools for Researchers

With the advancement in today’s world, empirical research has become critical and a norm in many fields to support their hypothesis and gain more knowledge. The methods mentioned above are very useful for carrying out such research. However, a number of new methods will keep coming up as the nature of new investigative questions keeps getting unique or changing.

Create a single source of real data with a built-for-insights platform. Store past data, add nuggets of insights, and import research data from various sources into a CRM for insights. Build on ever-growing research with a real-time dashboard in a unified research management platform to turn insights into knowledge.

LEARN MORE         FREE TRIAL

MORE LIKE THIS

How Can I Help You? — Tuesday CX Thoughts

Jun 5, 2024

Why Multilingual 360 Feedback Surveys Provide Better Insights

Jun 3, 2024

Raked Weighting: A Key Tool for Accurate Survey Results

May 31, 2024

Top 8 Data Trends to Understand the Future of Data

May 30, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Conceptual Research and its differences with Empirical Research

by Bastis Consultores | Sep 20, 2021 | Methodology | 0 comments

Conceptual research, as the name suggests, is research related to abstract concepts and ideas. It does not involve practical experimentation, but is based on the researcher analyzing the available information on a given topic. Conceptual research has been widely used in the study of philosophy to develop new theories, counter existing theories, or interpret existing theories in a different way.

Components of Conceptual Research

Conceptual research framework.

A conceptual research framework is constructed from existing literature and studies from which inferences can be drawn. The study is carried out to reduce existing knowledge gaps on a particular topic and to make relevant and reliable information available.

To create a conceptual research framework, the following steps can be followed:

Defining a research topic

The first step of the framework is to clearly define the topic of your research. Most researchers will choose a topic related to their field of expertise.

Collecting and organizing relevant research

Since conceptual research is based on pre-existing studies and literature, researchers should collect all pertinent information related to their topic.

It is important to use reliable sources and data from reputable scientific journals or research papers. As conceptual research does not employ the use of practical experimentation, the importance of analyzing reliable, fact-based studies is reinforced.

Identifying variables for research

The next step is to select the variables relevant to the research. These variables will be the scales with which the inferences will be made. They give a new scope to the research and also help to identify how the different variables may be affecting the subject of the research.

Creating the framework

The last step is to create the research framework using the relevant literature, variables and any other relevant material. The statement of the main question/problem of the research becomes your research framework.

Conceptual Research Example

An example of conceptual research is the philosophy of Thomas Malthus set forth in his book “An Essay on the Principle of Population”. In his book, Malthus theorized that due to disease, famine, war, and/or calamities, the human population would cease to expand.

His theory was based on observations about human population growth and the growth of food production. He claimed that the human population increased geometrically while food production only increased arithmetically. To reach this conclusion he used existing population and food statistics. Based on this information, he assumed that humans would end up being unable to produce enough food to support themselves.

For many reasons, Malthus’s theory was wrong. One of the most important is that technological advances were not taken into account, probably due to the time in which the research was carried out. Technological advances and global interconnection enabled a massive increase in food production and stimulated the flow of food from one country to another.

Although Multhus’s theory was based on the current statistics of his time, his observations turned out to be false.

Advantages of Conceptual Research

It requires few resources, compared to other forms of market research where practical experimentation is required. This saves time and resources.

It is a convenient form of research: As this form of research only requires the evaluation of the existing literature, it turns out to be a relatively convenient form of research.

Disadvantages of Conceptual Research

Questionable reliability and validity: Theories based on existing literature, rather than experimentation and observation, draw conclusions that are less based on facts and cannot necessarily be considered reliable.

It is subject to a greater number of errors or subjectivity: We often see that philosophical theories are refuted or revised because their conclusions are inferences drawn from existing texts and not from practical experimentation.

Conceptual Research vs Empirical Research

Scientific research is usually divided into two classes: conceptual research and empirical research. Before there were different ways of investigating and a researcher prided himself on being one or the other, praising his method and despising the alternative. Today the distinction is not so clear.

Conceptual research focuses on the concept or theory that explains or describes the phenomenon studied. What causes the disease? How can we describe the movement of the planets? What are the basic components of matter? The conceptual researcher sits at his desk with a pen in his hand and tries to solve these problems by thinking about them.

He doesn’t do experiments, but he can use the observations of others, since this is the mass of data he tries to make sense of. Until recently, conceptual research methodology was considered the most honorable form of research: it required using the brain, not the hands. Researchers who did experiments, like alchemists, were considered little better than blacksmiths: “disgusting empiricals.”

What is empirical research?

Despite their high status, conceptual researchers regularly produced theories that were wrong. Aristotle taught that large cannonballs fell to earth faster than small ones, and many generations of professors repeated his teachings until Galileo proved them wrong. Galileo was an empiricist of the best kind, who conducted original experiments not only to destroy old theories but to provide the basis for new theories.

The backlash against the ivory tower theorists culminated in those claiming to have no use for the theory, arguing that the empirical acquisition of knowledge was the only path to truth. A pure empiricist simply graphed the data and saw if he would get a straight-line relationship between the variables. If so, it had a good “empirical” relationship that allowed useful predictions to be made. The theory behind the correlation was irrelevant.

Conceptual Questions and Empirical Questions

Conceptual questions.

Philosophical questions tend to be conceptual in nature. This means that they cannot be answered simply by giving facts or information. A concept is the object of a thought, not something that is present to the senses.

Concepts are not a mystery, and although they are “abstract,” we use them all the time to organize our thinking. We literally couldn’t think or communicate without concepts. Some common examples of concepts are “justice,” “beauty,” and “truth,” but also “seven,” “blue,” or “big.”

When we ask a philosophical conceptual question, we usually inquire into the nature of something, or ask a question about how something is as it is. Ancient philosophers, such as Plato, posed conceptual questions such as “What is justice?” as the basis of philosophy. The statements “That action is wrong” or “Knowledge is a true justified belief” are conceptual statements.

In papers, you will often be asked to consider concepts, analyze and describe how philosophers use them, and perhaps compare them between texts. For example, you may be asked, “Do animals have rights?” This question asks you to consider what a right is and whether it is the kind of thing an animal should or even might have. He did not wonder whether or not there were any laws that actually granted those rights. Nor does it ask for your opinion on this question, but a reasoned position that is based on philosophical concepts and texts.

Empirical Questions

The word “empirical” means “obtained through experience.” Scientific experiments and observation give rise to empirical data. The scientific theories that organize the data are conceptual. Historical records or the results of sociological or psychological surveys are empirical. Making sense of those records or results requires the use of concepts.

Empirical questions can be answered by giving facts or information. Examples of empirical questions are: “What is the chemical composition of water?” or: “When did the French Revolution occur?” or: “Which education system gives rise to the highest literacy rate?”

The cycle of empirical research

The empirical research cycle is a 5-phase cycle that describes the systematic processes for conducting empirical research. It was developed by the Dutch psychologist A.D. de Groot in the 1940s and it aligns 5 important stages that can be considered deductive approaches to empirical research.

In the methodological cycle of empirical research, all processes are interconnected and neither of them is more important than the other. This cycle clearly outlines the different phases involved in the generation of research hypotheses and in the systematic testing of these hypotheses from empirical data.

Observation

It is the process of collecting empirical data for research. In this phase, the researcher collects relevant empirical data using qualitative or quantitative observation methods, and this serves to support the hypotheses of the research.

At this stage, the researcher makes use of inductive reasoning to reach a probable overall conclusion of the research based on his observation. The researcher generates a general hypothesis that tries to explain the empirical data and goes on to observe the empirical data according to this hypothesis.

It is the stage of deductive reasoning. In it, the researcher generates hypotheses by applying logic and rationality to his observation.

Here the researcher tests the hypotheses using qualitative or quantitative research methods. At the verification stage, the researcher combines the relevant instruments of systematic research with empirical methods to arrive at objective results that support or negate the research hypotheses.

Evaluation research is the final stage of an empirical research study. It presents the empirical data, the conclusions of the research and the arguments that support them, in addition to the problems that have been found during the research process.

This information is useful for future research.

Examples of empirical research

An empirical research study can be conducted to determine whether listening to upbeat music improves people’s mood. The researcher may have to conduct an experiment that involves exposing individuals to upbeat music to see if this improves their mood.

The results of such an experiment will provide empirical evidence that confirms or disproves the hypotheses.

An empirical research study may also be conducted to determine the effects of a new drug on specific groups of people. The researcher may expose research subjects to controlled amounts of the drug and observe the effects over a specific period of time to gather empirical data.

Another example of empirical research is the measurement of noise pollution levels in an urban area to determine the average levels of sound exposure experienced by its inhabitants. In this case, the researcher may have to administer questionnaires or conduct a survey to collect relevant data based on the experiences of the research subjects.

Empirical research can also be conducted to determine the relationship between seasonal migration and the body mass of flying birds. A researcher may need to observe the birds and carry out the observation and experimentation necessary to arrive at objective results that answer the research question.

Methods of data collection from empirical research

Empirical data can be collected using qualitative and quantitative data collection methods. Quantitative data collection methods are used for numerical data collection, while qualitative data collection processes are used to collect empirical data that cannot be quantified, i.e. non-numerical data.

The following are common methods of data collection in empirical research

Survey/ Questionnaire

The survey is a data collection method typically employed by researchers to gather large data sets from a specific number of respondents in relation to a research topic. This method of data collection is often used for quantitative data collection, although it can also be used in quantitative research.

A survey contains a set of questions that can range from closed questions to open-ended questions, along with other types of questions that revolve around the research topic. A survey can be administered physically or with the use of online data collection platforms.

Empirical data can also be collected by conducting an experiment. An experiment is a controlled simulation in which one or more of the variables of the research are manipulated by a set of interconnected processes in order to confirm or refute the hypotheses of the research.

An experiment is a useful method for measuring causality, i.e., cause and effect between dependent and independent variables in a research environment. It is a comprehensive method of data collection in an empirical research study because it involves checking calculated assumptions to arrive at the most valid data and research results.

Case Studies

The case study method is another common method of data collection in an empirical research study. It consists of examining and analyzing relevant cases and real-life experiences on the topic or variables of the research to discover in-depth information that can serve as empirical data.

The observation method is a qualitative data collection method that requires the researcher to study the behaviors of research variables in their natural environments to gather relevant information that can serve as empirical data.

Main Differences Between Conceptual Research and Empirical Research

Conceptual research is a type of research that is usually related to abstract ideas or concepts, while empirical research is any research study in which the conclusions of the study are drawn from evidence verifiable by observation or experience, rather than theory or pure logic.

Conceptual research has to do with abstract ideas and concepts; however, it does not involve any practical experiments. Empirical research, on the other hand, involves phenomena that are observable and measurable.

Type of studies

Philosophical research studies are examples of conceptual research studies, while empirical research includes both quantitative and qualitative studies.

The main difference between conceptual and empirical research is that conceptual research involves abstract ideas and concepts, while empirical research involves research based on observation, experiments, and verifiable evidence.

The Scientific Method: A Bit of Both

Modern scientific method is actually a combination of empirical and conceptual research. From known experimental data, a scientist formulates a working hypothesis to explain some aspect of nature. Then, it conducts new experiments designed to test the predictions of the theory, to support or disprove it. Einstein is often cited as an example of a conceptual researcher, but he based his theories on experimental observations and proposed experiments, real and thought, that would test his theories.

On the other hand, Edison is often considered an empiricist, with the “Edisonian method” being a trial-and-error term. But Edison appreciated the work of theorists and hired some of the best. Random screening of a myriad of possibilities remains valuable: pharmaceutical companies looking for new drugs do so, sometimes with great success.

Our specialists wait for you to contact them through the quote form or direct chat. We also have confidential communication channels such as WhatsApp and Messenger. And if you want to be aware of our innovative services and the different advantages of hiring us, follow us on Facebook, Instagram or Twitter.

If this article was to your liking, do not forget to share it on your social networks.

Bibliographic References

“Empirical Research: Definition, Methods, Types and Examples” QuestionPro, 14 Dec. 2018.

“Conceptual Research: Definition, Framework, Example and Advantages” QuestionPro, 18 Sept. 2018.

Patrick, M. “Conceptual Framework: A Step-by-Step Guide on How to Make One.” SimplyEducate.Me, 4 Dec. 2018.

You might also be interested in: Research Design: Cross-Sectional Study vs Longitudinal Study

Conceptual Research and its differences with Empirical Research. Photo: Unsplash. Credits: Mimi Thian @mimithian

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

Categories:

The most seen.

Copy short link