Dr Md Nazirul Islam Sarker 
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) has become increasingly popular in political science, communication, and policy research. Unfortunately, many studies misuse CDA by reducing it to quoting politicians or compiling soundbites. This approach weakens credibility and strips the method of its critical depth. True CDA goes further. It examines how language produces and reproduces power relations, inequality, … Read more
Pilot studies are essential for modern research. They help scholars test feasibility, refine tools, and identify potential challenges. However, pilot studies are not final research. Treating them as conclusive undermines credibility, misguides policy, and damages trust in science. This article explains the role of pilot studies, highlights common pitfalls, and offers practical solutions for using … Read more
Likert scales remain a staple in social science, management, and policy research. Their simplicity—“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”—makes them appealing for capturing opinions. Yet, their misuse often leads to statistical pitfalls that undermine credibility. This article explains the risks, provides solutions, and highlights best practices with supporting evidence. Why Likert Scales Are Popular Despite their … Read more
Thematic analysis is one of the most widely used qualitative methods in social sciences, policy research, and applied studies. Its popularity comes from flexibility and accessibility. It enables researchers to uncover hidden meanings and identify themes across interviews, focus groups, and documents. However, there is a critical challenge: without rigor, thematic analysis loses credibility. Instead … Read more
Meta-analysis is often hailed as the gold standard in evidence synthesis. Positioned at the top of the evidence hierarchy, it is seen as a reliable guide for research, policy, and practice. But here’s the reality: a meta-analysis is only as strong as the studies it includes and the methods it applies. Without rigor, the process … Read more
Impact assessments are widely regarded as the gold standard for evidence-based policymaking. Yet, behind many “causal” claims lies a silent but serious flaw: endogeneity. Most researchers focus on sample size, statistical fit, or significance levels. However, ignoring endogeneity can transform expensive evaluations into misleading exercises. Instead of guiding progress, such studies risk misallocating resources and … Read more
When researchers think of plagiarism, most imagine copy-pasting paragraphs. But in today’s publishing world, plagiarism goes far deeper. Citation mistakes—often unintentional—are one of the most common reasons manuscripts are flagged, desk-rejected, or even retracted. At Research & Report Consulting, we frequently review papers where the problem wasn’t copied text but sloppy referencing. Authors are surprised … Read more
Strong research can lose impact when visuals are poorly designed. Data visualization is not just about aesthetics—it communicates insights, strengthens arguments, and builds trust. Yet, many researchers unintentionally weaken their findings by presenting flawed visuals. In this article, we highlight the most common mistakes in research visualization, explain why they matter, and provide guidance on … Read more
Impact evaluations are often described as the gold standard of evidence-based decision-making. Governments, donors, and organizations rely on them to understand what works, what fails, and why. These evaluations inform billion-dollar policies and shape interventions that affect millions of lives. Yet, one of the most common—and costly—mistakes is attempting to measure impact without establishing a … Read more
Many researchers mistakenly believe that the presence of journal-relevant keywords in their title and abstract will sail their manuscript past initial screening. In truth, editors are looking for far more than buzzwords—they assess whether your submission fits the journal’s broader intellectual mission. Scope ≠ Keywords Journals don’t simply scan for topical keywords. Editors evaluate whether … Read more
