In qualitative research, the concept of “data saturation” is often cited as a justification for sample size and cessation of data collection. Yet, far too many researchers treat saturation as a magic number — often 12 or 15 interviews — based on citations taken out of context, without deep engagement with the analytical logic behind … Read more
In academic and applied research circles, the terms scoping and exploratory often carry an unintended implication: that the work is preliminary, informal, or exempt from rigor. That’s a dangerous myth. At Research & Report, we frequently observe a pattern: researchers use the label “exploratory” to excuse vague questions, ad-hoc methods, or weak analytical structure — … Read more
In quantitative research, justifying sample size is a fundamental requirement. Yet, one of the most misused tools in this process is G*Power — a free and powerful program that helps estimate sample sizes based on power analysis.While G*Power is valuable, it’s often misapplied or overly relied upon, leading to flawed research designs, underpowered studies, and … Read more
Despite the growing acceptance and institutionalization of qualitative research in academia, many studies still fall into a critical trap — they lack a solid theoretical foundation. While qualitative methods are celebrated for exploring complexity, meaning, and lived experience, they are increasingly being used in ways that are conceptually shallow, methodologically misaligned, and analytically weak. This … Read more
In an era of publish-or-perish, identifying a “research gap” has become a standard ritual in academic writing. Yet, most so-called gaps are superficial at best — and misleading at worst. A weak gap leads to weak contribution. And this is where most researchers, including many doctoral candidates and early-career academics, unknowingly undermine their own work. … Read more
