what are limitations of a research study

How to Write Limitations of the Study (with examples)

This blog emphasizes the importance of recognizing and effectively writing about limitations in research. It discusses the types of limitations, their significance, and provides guidelines for writing about them, highlighting their role in advancing scholarly research.

Updated on August 24, 2023

a group of researchers writing their limitation of their study

No matter how well thought out, every research endeavor encounters challenges. There is simply no way to predict all possible variances throughout the process.

These uncharted boundaries and abrupt constraints are known as limitations in research . Identifying and acknowledging limitations is crucial for conducting rigorous studies. Limitations provide context and shed light on gaps in the prevailing inquiry and literature.

This article explores the importance of recognizing limitations and discusses how to write them effectively. By interpreting limitations in research and considering prevalent examples, we aim to reframe the perception from shameful mistakes to respectable revelations.

What are limitations in research?

In the clearest terms, research limitations are the practical or theoretical shortcomings of a study that are often outside of the researcher’s control . While these weaknesses limit the generalizability of a study’s conclusions, they also present a foundation for future research.

Sometimes limitations arise from tangible circumstances like time and funding constraints, or equipment and participant availability. Other times the rationale is more obscure and buried within the research design. Common types of limitations and their ramifications include:

Theoretical: limits the scope, depth, or applicability of a study.
Methodological: limits the quality, quantity, or diversity of the data.
Empirical: limits the representativeness, validity, or reliability of the data.
Analytical: limits the accuracy, completeness, or significance of the findings.
Ethical: limits the access, consent, or confidentiality of the data.

Regardless of how, when, or why they arise, limitations are a natural part of the research process and should never be ignored . Like all other aspects, they are vital in their own purpose.

Why is identifying limitations important?

Whether to seek acceptance or avoid struggle, humans often instinctively hide flaws and mistakes. Merging this thought process into research by attempting to hide limitations, however, is a bad idea. It has the potential to negate the validity of outcomes and damage the reputation of scholars.

By identifying and addressing limitations throughout a project, researchers strengthen their arguments and curtail the chance of peer censure based on overlooked mistakes. Pointing out these flaws shows an understanding of variable limits and a scrupulous research process.

Showing awareness of and taking responsibility for a project’s boundaries and challenges validates the integrity and transparency of a researcher. It further demonstrates the researchers understand the applicable literature and have thoroughly evaluated their chosen research methods.

Presenting limitations also benefits the readers by providing context for research findings. It guides them to interpret the project’s conclusions only within the scope of very specific conditions. By allowing for an appropriate generalization of the findings that is accurately confined by research boundaries and is not too broad, limitations boost a study’s credibility .

Limitations are true assets to the research process. They highlight opportunities for future research. When researchers identify the limitations of their particular approach to a study question, they enable precise transferability and improve chances for reproducibility.

Simply stating a project’s limitations is not adequate for spurring further research, though. To spark the interest of other researchers, these acknowledgements must come with thorough explanations regarding how the limitations affected the current study and how they can potentially be overcome with amended methods.

How to write limitations

Typically, the information about a study’s limitations is situated either at the beginning of the discussion section to provide context for readers or at the conclusion of the discussion section to acknowledge the need for further research. However, it varies depending upon the target journal or publication guidelines.

Don’t hide your limitations

It is also important to not bury a limitation in the body of the paper unless it has a unique connection to a topic in that section. If so, it needs to be reiterated with the other limitations or at the conclusion of the discussion section. Wherever it is included in the manuscript, ensure that the limitations section is prominently positioned and clearly introduced.

While maintaining transparency by disclosing limitations means taking a comprehensive approach, it is not necessary to discuss everything that could have potentially gone wrong during the research study. If there is no commitment to investigation in the introduction, it is unnecessary to consider the issue a limitation to the research. Wholly consider the term ‘limitations’ and ask, “Did it significantly change or limit the possible outcomes?” Then, qualify the occurrence as either a limitation to include in the current manuscript or as an idea to note for other projects.

Writing limitations

Once the limitations are concretely identified and it is decided where they will be included in the paper, researchers are ready for the writing task. Including only what is pertinent, keeping explanations detailed but concise, and employing the following guidelines is key for crafting valuable limitations:

1) Identify and describe the limitations : Clearly introduce the limitation by classifying its form and specifying its origin. For example:

An unintentional bias encountered during data collection
An intentional use of unplanned post-hoc data analysis

2) Explain the implications : Describe how the limitation potentially influences the study’s findings and how the validity and generalizability are subsequently impacted. Provide examples and evidence to support claims of the limitations’ effects without making excuses or exaggerating their impact. Overall, be transparent and objective in presenting the limitations, without undermining the significance of the research.

3) Provide alternative approaches for future studies : Offer specific suggestions for potential improvements or avenues for further investigation. Demonstrate a proactive approach by encouraging future research that addresses the identified gaps and, therefore, expands the knowledge base.

Whether presenting limitations as an individual section within the manuscript or as a subtopic in the discussion area, authors should use clear headings and straightforward language to facilitate readability. There is no need to complicate limitations with jargon, computations, or complex datasets.

Examples of common limitations

Limitations are generally grouped into two categories , methodology and research process .

Methodology limitations

Methodology may include limitations due to:

Sample size
Lack of available or reliable data
Lack of prior research studies on the topic
Measure used to collect the data
Self-reported data

The researcher is addressing how the large sample size requires a reassessment of the measures used to collect and analyze the data.

Research process limitations

Limitations during the research process may arise from:

Access to information
Longitudinal effects
Cultural and other biases
Language fluency
Time constraints

The author is pointing out that the model’s estimates are based on potentially biased observational studies.

Final thoughts

Successfully proving theories and touting great achievements are only two very narrow goals of scholarly research. The true passion and greatest efforts of researchers comes more in the form of confronting assumptions and exploring the obscure.

In many ways, recognizing and sharing the limitations of a research study both allows for and encourages this type of discovery that continuously pushes research forward. By using limitations to provide a transparent account of the project's boundaries and to contextualize the findings, researchers pave the way for even more robust and impactful research in the future.

Charla Viera, MS

See our "Privacy Policy"

Ensure your structure and ideas are consistent and clearly communicated

Pair your Premium Editing with our add-on service Presubmission Review for an overall assessment of your manuscript.

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » Limitations in Research – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Limitations in Research – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Limitations in Research

Limitations in research refer to the factors that may affect the results, conclusions , and generalizability of a study. These limitations can arise from various sources, such as the design of the study, the sampling methods used, the measurement tools employed, and the limitations of the data analysis techniques.

Types of Limitations in Research

Types of Limitations in Research are as follows:

Sample Size Limitations

This refers to the size of the group of people or subjects that are being studied. If the sample size is too small, then the results may not be representative of the population being studied. This can lead to a lack of generalizability of the results.

Time Limitations

Time limitations can be a constraint on the research process . This could mean that the study is unable to be conducted for a long enough period of time to observe the long-term effects of an intervention, or to collect enough data to draw accurate conclusions.

Selection Bias

This refers to a type of bias that can occur when the selection of participants in a study is not random. This can lead to a biased sample that is not representative of the population being studied.

Confounding Variables

Confounding variables are factors that can influence the outcome of a study, but are not being measured or controlled for. These can lead to inaccurate conclusions or a lack of clarity in the results.

Measurement Error

This refers to inaccuracies in the measurement of variables, such as using a faulty instrument or scale. This can lead to inaccurate results or a lack of validity in the study.

Ethical Limitations

Ethical limitations refer to the ethical constraints placed on research studies. For example, certain studies may not be allowed to be conducted due to ethical concerns, such as studies that involve harm to participants.

Examples of Limitations in Research

Some Examples of Limitations in Research are as follows:

Research Title: “The Effectiveness of Machine Learning Algorithms in Predicting Customer Behavior”

Limitations:

The study only considered a limited number of machine learning algorithms and did not explore the effectiveness of other algorithms.
The study used a specific dataset, which may not be representative of all customer behaviors or demographics.
The study did not consider the potential ethical implications of using machine learning algorithms in predicting customer behavior.

Research Title: “The Impact of Online Learning on Student Performance in Computer Science Courses”

The study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have affected the results due to the unique circumstances of remote learning.
The study only included students from a single university, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other institutions.
The study did not consider the impact of individual differences, such as prior knowledge or motivation, on student performance in online learning environments.

Research Title: “The Effect of Gamification on User Engagement in Mobile Health Applications”

The study only tested a specific gamification strategy and did not explore the effectiveness of other gamification techniques.
The study relied on self-reported measures of user engagement, which may be subject to social desirability bias or measurement errors.
The study only included a specific demographic group (e.g., young adults) and may not be generalizable to other populations with different preferences or needs.

How to Write Limitations in Research

When writing about the limitations of a research study, it is important to be honest and clear about the potential weaknesses of your work. Here are some tips for writing about limitations in research:

Identify the limitations: Start by identifying the potential limitations of your research. These may include sample size, selection bias, measurement error, or other issues that could affect the validity and reliability of your findings.
Be honest and objective: When describing the limitations of your research, be honest and objective. Do not try to minimize or downplay the limitations, but also do not exaggerate them. Be clear and concise in your description of the limitations.
Provide context: It is important to provide context for the limitations of your research. For example, if your sample size was small, explain why this was the case and how it may have affected your results. Providing context can help readers understand the limitations in a broader context.
Discuss implications : Discuss the implications of the limitations for your research findings. For example, if there was a selection bias in your sample, explain how this may have affected the generalizability of your findings. This can help readers understand the limitations in terms of their impact on the overall validity of your research.
Provide suggestions for future research : Finally, provide suggestions for future research that can address the limitations of your study. This can help readers understand how your research fits into the broader field and can provide a roadmap for future studies.

Purpose of Limitations in Research

There are several purposes of limitations in research. Here are some of the most important ones:

To acknowledge the boundaries of the study : Limitations help to define the scope of the research project and set realistic expectations for the findings. They can help to clarify what the study is not intended to address.
To identify potential sources of bias: Limitations can help researchers identify potential sources of bias in their research design, data collection, or analysis. This can help to improve the validity and reliability of the findings.
To provide opportunities for future research: Limitations can highlight areas for future research and suggest avenues for further exploration. This can help to advance knowledge in a particular field.
To demonstrate transparency and accountability: By acknowledging the limitations of their research, researchers can demonstrate transparency and accountability to their readers, peers, and funders. This can help to build trust and credibility in the research community.
To encourage critical thinking: Limitations can encourage readers to critically evaluate the study’s findings and consider alternative explanations or interpretations. This can help to promote a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of the topic under investigation.

When to Write Limitations in Research

Limitations should be included in research when they help to provide a more complete understanding of the study’s results and implications. A limitation is any factor that could potentially impact the accuracy, reliability, or generalizability of the study’s findings.

It is important to identify and discuss limitations in research because doing so helps to ensure that the results are interpreted appropriately and that any conclusions drawn are supported by the available evidence. Limitations can also suggest areas for future research, highlight potential biases or confounding factors that may have affected the results, and provide context for the study’s findings.

Generally, limitations should be discussed in the conclusion section of a research paper or thesis, although they may also be mentioned in other sections, such as the introduction or methods. The specific limitations that are discussed will depend on the nature of the study, the research question being investigated, and the data that was collected.

Examples of limitations that might be discussed in research include sample size limitations, data collection methods, the validity and reliability of measures used, and potential biases or confounding factors that could have affected the results. It is important to note that limitations should not be used as a justification for poor research design or methodology, but rather as a way to enhance the understanding and interpretation of the study’s findings.

Importance of Limitations in Research

Here are some reasons why limitations are important in research:

Enhances the credibility of research: Limitations highlight the potential weaknesses and threats to validity, which helps readers to understand the scope and boundaries of the study. This improves the credibility of research by acknowledging its limitations and providing a clear picture of what can and cannot be concluded from the study.
Facilitates replication: By highlighting the limitations, researchers can provide detailed information about the study’s methodology, data collection, and analysis. This information helps other researchers to replicate the study and test the validity of the findings, which enhances the reliability of research.
Guides future research : Limitations provide insights into areas for future research by identifying gaps or areas that require further investigation. This can help researchers to design more comprehensive and effective studies that build on existing knowledge.
Provides a balanced view: Limitations help to provide a balanced view of the research by highlighting both strengths and weaknesses. This ensures that readers have a clear understanding of the study’s limitations and can make informed decisions about the generalizability and applicability of the findings.

Advantages of Limitations in Research

Here are some potential advantages of limitations in research:

Focus : Limitations can help researchers focus their study on a specific area or population, which can make the research more relevant and useful.
Realism : Limitations can make a study more realistic by reflecting the practical constraints and challenges of conducting research in the real world.
Innovation : Limitations can spur researchers to be more innovative and creative in their research design and methodology, as they search for ways to work around the limitations.
Rigor : Limitations can actually increase the rigor and credibility of a study, as researchers are forced to carefully consider the potential sources of bias and error, and address them to the best of their abilities.
Generalizability : Limitations can actually improve the generalizability of a study by ensuring that it is not overly focused on a specific sample or situation, and that the results can be applied more broadly.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

USC Libraries
Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

Limitations of the Study
Purpose of Guide
Design Flaws to Avoid
Independent and Dependent Variables
Glossary of Research Terms
Reading Research Effectively
Narrowing a Topic Idea
Broadening a Topic Idea
Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
Academic Writing Style
Applying Critical Thinking
Choosing a Title
Making an Outline
Paragraph Development
Research Process Video Series
Executive Summary
The C.A.R.S. Model
Background Information
The Research Problem/Question
Theoretical Framework
Citation Tracking
Content Alert Services
Evaluating Sources
Primary Sources
Secondary Sources
Tiertiary Sources
Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
Qualitative Methods
Quantitative Methods
Insiderness
Using Non-Textual Elements
Common Grammar Mistakes
Writing Concisely
Avoiding Plagiarism
Footnotes or Endnotes?
Further Readings
Generative AI and Writing
USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
Bibliography

The limitations of the study are those characteristics of design or methodology that impacted or influenced the interpretation of the findings from your research. Study limitations are the constraints placed on the ability to generalize from the results, to further describe applications to practice, and/or related to the utility of findings that are the result of the ways in which you initially chose to design the study or the method used to establish internal and external validity or the result of unanticipated challenges that emerged during the study.

Price, James H. and Judy Murnan. “Research Limitations and the Necessity of Reporting Them.” American Journal of Health Education 35 (2004): 66-67; Theofanidis, Dimitrios and Antigoni Fountouki. "Limitations and Delimitations in the Research Process." Perioperative Nursing 7 (September-December 2018): 155-163. .

Importance of...

Always acknowledge a study's limitations. It is far better that you identify and acknowledge your study’s limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor and have your grade lowered because you appeared to have ignored them or didn't realize they existed.

Keep in mind that acknowledgment of a study's limitations is an opportunity to make suggestions for further research. If you do connect your study's limitations to suggestions for further research, be sure to explain the ways in which these unanswered questions may become more focused because of your study.

Acknowledgment of a study's limitations also provides you with opportunities to demonstrate that you have thought critically about the research problem, understood the relevant literature published about it, and correctly assessed the methods chosen for studying the problem. A key objective of the research process is not only discovering new knowledge but also to confront assumptions and explore what we don't know.

Claiming limitations is a subjective process because you must evaluate the impact of those limitations . Don't just list key weaknesses and the magnitude of a study's limitations. To do so diminishes the validity of your research because it leaves the reader wondering whether, or in what ways, limitation(s) in your study may have impacted the results and conclusions. Limitations require a critical, overall appraisal and interpretation of their impact. You should answer the question: do these problems with errors, methods, validity, etc. eventually matter and, if so, to what extent?

Price, James H. and Judy Murnan. “Research Limitations and the Necessity of Reporting Them.” American Journal of Health Education 35 (2004): 66-67; Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation. Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com.

Descriptions of Possible Limitations

All studies have limitations . However, it is important that you restrict your discussion to limitations related to the research problem under investigation. For example, if a meta-analysis of existing literature is not a stated purpose of your research, it should not be discussed as a limitation. Do not apologize for not addressing issues that you did not promise to investigate in the introduction of your paper.

Here are examples of limitations related to methodology and the research process you may need to describe and discuss how they possibly impacted your results. Note that descriptions of limitations should be stated in the past tense because they were discovered after you completed your research.

Possible Methodological Limitations

Sample size -- the number of the units of analysis you use in your study is dictated by the type of research problem you are investigating. Note that, if your sample size is too small, it will be difficult to find significant relationships from the data, as statistical tests normally require a larger sample size to ensure a representative distribution of the population and to be considered representative of groups of people to whom results will be generalized or transferred. Note that sample size is generally less relevant in qualitative research if explained in the context of the research problem.
Lack of available and/or reliable data -- a lack of data or of reliable data will likely require you to limit the scope of your analysis, the size of your sample, or it can be a significant obstacle in finding a trend and a meaningful relationship. You need to not only describe these limitations but provide cogent reasons why you believe data is missing or is unreliable. However, don’t just throw up your hands in frustration; use this as an opportunity to describe a need for future research based on designing a different method for gathering data.
Lack of prior research studies on the topic -- citing prior research studies forms the basis of your literature review and helps lay a foundation for understanding the research problem you are investigating. Depending on the currency or scope of your research topic, there may be little, if any, prior research on your topic. Before assuming this to be true, though, consult with a librarian! In cases when a librarian has confirmed that there is little or no prior research, you may be required to develop an entirely new research typology [for example, using an exploratory rather than an explanatory research design ]. Note again that discovering a limitation can serve as an important opportunity to identify new gaps in the literature and to describe the need for further research.
Measure used to collect the data -- sometimes it is the case that, after completing your interpretation of the findings, you discover that the way in which you gathered data inhibited your ability to conduct a thorough analysis of the results. For example, you regret not including a specific question in a survey that, in retrospect, could have helped address a particular issue that emerged later in the study. Acknowledge the deficiency by stating a need for future researchers to revise the specific method for gathering data.
Self-reported data -- whether you are relying on pre-existing data or you are conducting a qualitative research study and gathering the data yourself, self-reported data is limited by the fact that it rarely can be independently verified. In other words, you have to the accuracy of what people say, whether in interviews, focus groups, or on questionnaires, at face value. However, self-reported data can contain several potential sources of bias that you should be alert to and note as limitations. These biases become apparent if they are incongruent with data from other sources. These are: (1) selective memory [remembering or not remembering experiences or events that occurred at some point in the past]; (2) telescoping [recalling events that occurred at one time as if they occurred at another time]; (3) attribution [the act of attributing positive events and outcomes to one's own agency, but attributing negative events and outcomes to external forces]; and, (4) exaggeration [the act of representing outcomes or embellishing events as more significant than is actually suggested from other data].

Possible Limitations of the Researcher

Access -- if your study depends on having access to people, organizations, data, or documents and, for whatever reason, access is denied or limited in some way, the reasons for this needs to be described. Also, include an explanation why being denied or limited access did not prevent you from following through on your study.
Longitudinal effects -- unlike your professor, who can literally devote years [even a lifetime] to studying a single topic, the time available to investigate a research problem and to measure change or stability over time is constrained by the due date of your assignment. Be sure to choose a research problem that does not require an excessive amount of time to complete the literature review, apply the methodology, and gather and interpret the results. If you're unsure whether you can complete your research within the confines of the assignment's due date, talk to your professor.
Cultural and other type of bias -- we all have biases, whether we are conscience of them or not. Bias is when a person, place, event, or thing is viewed or shown in a consistently inaccurate way. Bias is usually negative, though one can have a positive bias as well, especially if that bias reflects your reliance on research that only support your hypothesis. When proof-reading your paper, be especially critical in reviewing how you have stated a problem, selected the data to be studied, what may have been omitted, the manner in which you have ordered events, people, or places, how you have chosen to represent a person, place, or thing, to name a phenomenon, or to use possible words with a positive or negative connotation. NOTE : If you detect bias in prior research, it must be acknowledged and you should explain what measures were taken to avoid perpetuating that bias. For example, if a previous study only used boys to examine how music education supports effective math skills, describe how your research expands the study to include girls.
Fluency in a language -- if your research focuses , for example, on measuring the perceived value of after-school tutoring among Mexican-American ESL [English as a Second Language] students and you are not fluent in Spanish, you are limited in being able to read and interpret Spanish language research studies on the topic or to speak with these students in their primary language. This deficiency should be acknowledged.

Structure and Writing Style

If you determine that your study is seriously flawed due to important limitations , such as, an inability to acquire critical data, consider reframing it as an exploratory study intended to lay the groundwork for a more complete research study in the future. Be sure, though, to specifically explain the ways that these flaws can be successfully overcome in a new study.

But, do not use this as an excuse for not developing a thorough research paper! Review the tab in this guide for developing a research topic . If serious limitations exist, it generally indicates a likelihood that your research problem is too narrowly defined or that the issue or event under study is too recent and, thus, very little research has been written about it. If serious limitations do emerge, consult with your professor about possible ways to overcome them or how to revise your study.

When discussing the limitations of your research, be sure to:

Describe each limitation in detailed but concise terms;
Explain why each limitation exists;
Provide the reasons why each limitation could not be overcome using the method(s) chosen to acquire or gather the data [cite to other studies that had similar problems when possible];
Assess the impact of each limitation in relation to the overall findings and conclusions of your study; and,
If appropriate, describe how these limitations could point to the need for further research.

Remember that the method you chose may be the source of a significant limitation that has emerged during your interpretation of the results [for example, you didn't interview a group of people that you later wish you had]. If this is the case, don't panic. Acknowledge it, and explain how applying a different or more robust methodology might address the research problem more effectively in a future study. A underlying goal of scholarly research is not only to show what works, but to demonstrate what doesn't work or what needs further clarification.

Aguinis, Hermam and Jeffrey R. Edwards. “Methodological Wishes for the Next Decade and How to Make Wishes Come True.” Journal of Management Studies 51 (January 2014): 143-174; Brutus, Stéphane et al. "Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports: Analysis and Recommendations." Journal of Management 39 (January 2013): 48-75; Ioannidis, John P.A. "Limitations are not Properly Acknowledged in the Scientific Literature." Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 60 (2007): 324-329; Pasek, Josh. Writing the Empirical Social Science Research Paper: A Guide for the Perplexed. January 24, 2012. Academia.edu; Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation. Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com; What Is an Academic Paper? Institute for Writing Rhetoric. Dartmouth College; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University.

Writing Tip

Don't Inflate the Importance of Your Findings!

After all the hard work and long hours devoted to writing your research paper, it is easy to get carried away with attributing unwarranted importance to what you’ve done. We all want our academic work to be viewed as excellent and worthy of a good grade, but it is important that you understand and openly acknowledge the limitations of your study. Inflating the importance of your study's findings could be perceived by your readers as an attempt hide its flaws or encourage a biased interpretation of the results. A small measure of humility goes a long way!

Another Writing Tip

Negative Results are Not a Limitation!

Negative evidence refers to findings that unexpectedly challenge rather than support your hypothesis. If you didn't get the results you anticipated, it may mean your hypothesis was incorrect and needs to be reformulated. Or, perhaps you have stumbled onto something unexpected that warrants further study. Moreover, the absence of an effect may be very telling in many situations, particularly in experimental research designs. In any case, your results may very well be of importance to others even though they did not support your hypothesis. Do not fall into the trap of thinking that results contrary to what you expected is a limitation to your study. If you carried out the research well, they are simply your results and only require additional interpretation.

Lewis, George H. and Jonathan F. Lewis. “The Dog in the Night-Time: Negative Evidence in Social Research.” The British Journal of Sociology 31 (December 1980): 544-558.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Sample Size Limitations in Qualitative Research

Sample sizes are typically smaller in qualitative research because, as the study goes on, acquiring more data does not necessarily lead to more information. This is because one occurrence of a piece of data, or a code, is all that is necessary to ensure that it becomes part of the analysis framework. However, it remains true that sample sizes that are too small cannot adequately support claims of having achieved valid conclusions and sample sizes that are too large do not permit the deep, naturalistic, and inductive analysis that defines qualitative inquiry. Determining adequate sample size in qualitative research is ultimately a matter of judgment and experience in evaluating the quality of the information collected against the uses to which it will be applied and the particular research method and purposeful sampling strategy employed. If the sample size is found to be a limitation, it may reflect your judgment about the methodological technique chosen [e.g., single life history study versus focus group interviews] rather than the number of respondents used.

Boddy, Clive Roland. "Sample Size for Qualitative Research." Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 19 (2016): 426-432; Huberman, A. Michael and Matthew B. Miles. "Data Management and Analysis Methods." In Handbook of Qualitative Research . Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994), pp. 428-444; Blaikie, Norman. "Confounding Issues Related to Determining Sample Size in Qualitative Research." International Journal of Social Research Methodology 21 (2018): 635-641; Oppong, Steward Harrison. "The Problem of Sampling in qualitative Research." Asian Journal of Management Sciences and Education 2 (2013): 202-210.

<< Previous: 8. The Discussion
Next: 9. The Conclusion >>
Last Updated: Apr 20, 2024 2:57 PM
URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

21 Research Limitations Examples

research limitations examples and definition, explained below

Research limitations refer to the potential weaknesses inherent in a study. All studies have limitations of some sort, meaning declaring limitations doesn’t necessarily need to be a bad thing, so long as your declaration of limitations is well thought-out and explained.

Rarely is a study perfect. Researchers have to make trade-offs when developing their studies, which are often based upon practical considerations such as time and monetary constraints, weighing the breadth of participants against the depth of insight, and choosing one methodology or another.

In research, studies can have limitations such as limited scope, researcher subjectivity, and lack of available research tools.

Acknowledging the limitations of your study should be seen as a strength. It demonstrates your willingness for transparency, humility, and submission to the scientific method and can bolster the integrity of the study. It can also inform future research direction.

Typically, scholars will explore the limitations of their study in either their methodology section, their conclusion section, or both.

Research Limitations Examples

Qualitative and quantitative research offer different perspectives and methods in exploring phenomena, each with its own strengths and limitations. So, I’ve split the limitations examples sections into qualitative and quantitative below.

Qualitative Research Limitations

Qualitative research seeks to understand phenomena in-depth and in context. It focuses on the ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions.

It’s often used to explore new or complex issues, and it provides rich, detailed insights into participants’ experiences, behaviors, and attitudes. However, these strengths also create certain limitations, as explained below.

1. Subjectivity

Qualitative research often requires the researcher to interpret subjective data. One researcher may examine a text and identify different themes or concepts as more dominant than others.

Close qualitative readings of texts are necessarily subjective – and while this may be a limitation, qualitative researchers argue this is the best way to deeply understand everything in context.

Suggested Solution and Response: To minimize subjectivity bias, you could consider cross-checking your own readings of themes and data against other scholars’ readings and interpretations. This may involve giving the raw data to a supervisor or colleague and asking them to code the data separately, then coming together to compare and contrast results.

2. Researcher Bias

The concept of researcher bias is related to, but slightly different from, subjectivity.

Researcher bias refers to the perspectives and opinions you bring with you when doing your research.

For example, a researcher who is explicitly of a certain philosophical or political persuasion may bring that persuasion to bear when interpreting data.

In many scholarly traditions, we will attempt to minimize researcher bias through the utilization of clear procedures that are set out in advance or through the use of statistical analysis tools.

However, in other traditions, such as in postmodern feminist research , declaration of bias is expected, and acknowledgment of bias is seen as a positive because, in those traditions, it is believed that bias cannot be eliminated from research, so instead, it is a matter of integrity to present it upfront.

Suggested Solution and Response: Acknowledge the potential for researcher bias and, depending on your theoretical framework , accept this, or identify procedures you have taken to seek a closer approximation to objectivity in your coding and analysis.

3. Generalizability

If you’re struggling to find a limitation to discuss in your own qualitative research study, then this one is for you: all qualitative research, of all persuasions and perspectives, cannot be generalized.

This is a core feature that sets qualitative data and quantitative data apart.

The point of qualitative data is to select case studies and similarly small corpora and dig deep through in-depth analysis and thick description of data.

Often, this will also mean that you have a non-randomized sample size.

While this is a positive – you’re going to get some really deep, contextualized, interesting insights – it also means that the findings may not be generalizable to a larger population that may not be representative of the small group of people in your study.

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest future studies that take a quantitative approach to the question.

4. The Hawthorne Effect

The Hawthorne effect refers to the phenomenon where research participants change their ‘observed behavior’ when they’re aware that they are being observed.

This effect was first identified by Elton Mayo who conducted studies of the effects of various factors ton workers’ productivity. He noticed that no matter what he did – turning up the lights, turning down the lights, etc. – there was an increase in worker outputs compared to prior to the study taking place.

Mayo realized that the mere act of observing the workers made them work harder – his observation was what was changing behavior.

So, if you’re looking for a potential limitation to name for your observational research study , highlight the possible impact of the Hawthorne effect (and how you could reduce your footprint or visibility in order to decrease its likelihood).

Suggested Solution and Response: Highlight ways you have attempted to reduce your footprint while in the field, and guarantee anonymity to your research participants.

5. Replicability

Quantitative research has a great benefit in that the studies are replicable – a researcher can get a similar sample size, duplicate the variables, and re-test a study. But you can’t do that in qualitative research.

Qualitative research relies heavily on context – a specific case study or specific variables that make a certain instance worthy of analysis. As a result, it’s often difficult to re-enter the same setting with the same variables and repeat the study.

Furthermore, the individual researcher’s interpretation is more influential in qualitative research, meaning even if a new researcher enters an environment and makes observations, their observations may be different because subjectivity comes into play much more. This doesn’t make the research bad necessarily (great insights can be made in qualitative research), but it certainly does demonstrate a weakness of qualitative research.

6. Limited Scope

“Limited scope” is perhaps one of the most common limitations listed by researchers – and while this is often a catch-all way of saying, “well, I’m not studying that in this study”, it’s also a valid point.

No study can explore everything related to a topic. At some point, we have to make decisions about what’s included in the study and what is excluded from the study.

So, you could say that a limitation of your study is that it doesn’t look at an extra variable or concept that’s certainly worthy of study but will have to be explored in your next project because this project has a clearly and narrowly defined goal.

Suggested Solution and Response: Be clear about what’s in and out of the study when writing your research question.

7. Time Constraints

This is also a catch-all claim you can make about your research project: that you would have included more people in the study, looked at more variables, and so on. But you’ve got to submit this thing by the end of next semester! You’ve got time constraints.

And time constraints are a recognized reality in all research.

But this means you’ll need to explain how time has limited your decisions. As with “limited scope”, this may mean that you had to study a smaller group of subjects, limit the amount of time you spent in the field, and so forth.

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest future studies that will build on your current work, possibly as a PhD project.

8. Resource Intensiveness

Qualitative research can be expensive due to the cost of transcription, the involvement of trained researchers, and potential travel for interviews or observations.

So, resource intensiveness is similar to the time constraints concept. If you don’t have the funds, you have to make decisions about which tools to use, which statistical software to employ, and how many research assistants you can dedicate to the study.

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest future studies that will gain more funding on the back of this ‘ exploratory study ‘.

9. Coding Difficulties

Data analysis in qualitative research often involves coding, which can be subjective and complex, especially when dealing with ambiguous or contradicting data.

After naming this as a limitation in your research, it’s important to explain how you’ve attempted to address this. Some ways to ‘limit the limitation’ include:

Triangulation: Have 2 other researchers code the data as well and cross-check your results with theirs to identify outliers that may need to be re-examined, debated with the other researchers, or removed altogether.
Procedure: Use a clear coding procedure to demonstrate reliability in your coding process. I personally use the thematic network analysis method outlined in this academic article by Attride-Stirling (2001).

Suggested Solution and Response: Triangulate your coding findings with colleagues, and follow a thematic network analysis procedure.

10. Risk of Non-Responsiveness

There is always a risk in research that research participants will be unwilling or uncomfortable sharing their genuine thoughts and feelings in the study.

This is particularly true when you’re conducting research on sensitive topics, politicized topics, or topics where the participant is expressing vulnerability .

This is similar to the Hawthorne effect (aka participant bias), where participants change their behaviors in your presence; but it goes a step further, where participants actively hide their true thoughts and feelings from you.

Suggested Solution and Response: One way to manage this is to try to include a wider group of people with the expectation that there will be non-responsiveness from some participants.

11. Risk of Attrition

Attrition refers to the process of losing research participants throughout the study.

This occurs most commonly in longitudinal studies , where a researcher must return to conduct their analysis over spaced periods of time, often over a period of years.

Things happen to people over time – they move overseas, their life experiences change, they get sick, change their minds, and even die. The more time that passes, the greater the risk of attrition.

Suggested Solution and Response: One way to manage this is to try to include a wider group of people with the expectation that there will be attrition over time.

12. Difficulty in Maintaining Confidentiality and Anonymity

Given the detailed nature of qualitative data , ensuring participant anonymity can be challenging.

If you have a sensitive topic in a specific case study, even anonymizing research participants sometimes isn’t enough. People might be able to induce who you’re talking about.

Sometimes, this will mean you have to exclude some interesting data that you collected from your final report. Confidentiality and anonymity come before your findings in research ethics – and this is a necessary limiting factor.

Suggested Solution and Response: Highlight the efforts you have taken to anonymize data, and accept that confidentiality and accountability place extremely important constraints on academic research.

13. Difficulty in Finding Research Participants

A study that looks at a very specific phenomenon or even a specific set of cases within a phenomenon means that the pool of potential research participants can be very low.

Compile on top of this the fact that many people you approach may choose not to participate, and you could end up with a very small corpus of subjects to explore. This may limit your ability to make complete findings, even in a quantitative sense.

You may need to therefore limit your research question and objectives to something more realistic.

Suggested Solution and Response: Highlight that this is going to limit the study’s generalizability significantly.

14. Ethical Limitations

Ethical limitations refer to the things you cannot do based on ethical concerns identified either by yourself or your institution’s ethics review board.

This might include threats to the physical or psychological well-being of your research subjects, the potential of releasing data that could harm a person’s reputation, and so on.

Furthermore, even if your study follows all expected standards of ethics, you still, as an ethical researcher, need to allow a research participant to pull out at any point in time, after which you cannot use their data, which demonstrates an overlap between ethical constraints and participant attrition.

Suggested Solution and Response: Highlight that these ethical limitations are inevitable but important to sustain the integrity of the research.

For more on Qualitative Research, Explore my Qualitative Research Guide

Quantitative Research Limitations

Quantitative research focuses on quantifiable data and statistical, mathematical, or computational techniques. It’s often used to test hypotheses, assess relationships and causality, and generalize findings across larger populations.

Quantitative research is widely respected for its ability to provide reliable, measurable, and generalizable data (if done well!). Its structured methodology has strengths over qualitative research, such as the fact it allows for replication of the study, which underpins the validity of the research.

However, this approach is not without it limitations, explained below.

1. Over-Simplification

Quantitative research is powerful because it allows you to measure and analyze data in a systematic and standardized way. However, one of its limitations is that it can sometimes simplify complex phenomena or situations.

In other words, it might miss the subtleties or nuances of the research subject.

For example, if you’re studying why people choose a particular diet, a quantitative study might identify factors like age, income, or health status. But it might miss other aspects, such as cultural influences or personal beliefs, that can also significantly impact dietary choices.

When writing about this limitation, you can say that your quantitative approach, while providing precise measurements and comparisons, may not capture the full complexity of your subjects of study.

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest a follow-up case study using the same research participants in order to gain additional context and depth.

2. Lack of Context

Another potential issue with quantitative research is that it often focuses on numbers and statistics at the expense of context or qualitative information.

Let’s say you’re studying the effect of classroom size on student performance. You might find that students in smaller classes generally perform better. However, this doesn’t take into account other variables, like teaching style , student motivation, or family support.

When describing this limitation, you might say, “Although our research provides important insights into the relationship between class size and student performance, it does not incorporate the impact of other potentially influential variables. Future research could benefit from a mixed-methods approach that combines quantitative analysis with qualitative insights.”

3. Applicability to Real-World Settings

Oftentimes, experimental research takes place in controlled environments to limit the influence of outside factors.

This control is great for isolation and understanding the specific phenomenon but can limit the applicability or “external validity” of the research to real-world settings.

For example, if you conduct a lab experiment to see how sleep deprivation impacts cognitive performance, the sterile, controlled lab environment might not reflect real-world conditions where people are dealing with multiple stressors.

Therefore, when explaining the limitations of your quantitative study in your methodology section, you could state:

“While our findings provide valuable information about [topic], the controlled conditions of the experiment may not accurately represent real-world scenarios where extraneous variables will exist. As such, the direct applicability of our results to broader contexts may be limited.”

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest future studies that will engage in real-world observational research, such as ethnographic research.

4. Limited Flexibility

Once a quantitative study is underway, it can be challenging to make changes to it. This is because, unlike in grounded research, you’re putting in place your study in advance, and you can’t make changes part-way through.

Your study design, data collection methods, and analysis techniques need to be decided upon before you start collecting data.

For example, if you are conducting a survey on the impact of social media on teenage mental health, and halfway through, you realize that you should have included a question about their screen time, it’s generally too late to add it.

When discussing this limitation, you could write something like, “The structured nature of our quantitative approach allows for consistent data collection and analysis but also limits our flexibility to adapt and modify the research process in response to emerging insights and ideas.”

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest future studies that will use mixed-methods or qualitative research methods to gain additional depth of insight.

5. Risk of Survey Error

Surveys are a common tool in quantitative research, but they carry risks of error.

There can be measurement errors (if a question is misunderstood), coverage errors (if some groups aren’t adequately represented), non-response errors (if certain people don’t respond), and sampling errors (if your sample isn’t representative of the population).

For instance, if you’re surveying college students about their study habits , but only daytime students respond because you conduct the survey during the day, your results will be skewed.

In discussing this limitation, you might say, “Despite our best efforts to develop a comprehensive survey, there remains a risk of survey error, including measurement, coverage, non-response, and sampling errors. These could potentially impact the reliability and generalizability of our findings.”

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest future studies that will use other survey tools to compare and contrast results.

6. Limited Ability to Probe Answers

With quantitative research, you typically can’t ask follow-up questions or delve deeper into participants’ responses like you could in a qualitative interview.

For instance, imagine you are surveying 500 students about study habits in a questionnaire. A respondent might indicate that they study for two hours each night. You might want to follow up by asking them to elaborate on what those study sessions involve or how effective they feel their habits are.

However, quantitative research generally disallows this in the way a qualitative semi-structured interview could.

When discussing this limitation, you might write, “Given the structured nature of our survey, our ability to probe deeper into individual responses is limited. This means we may not fully understand the context or reasoning behind the responses, potentially limiting the depth of our findings.”

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest future studies that engage in mixed-method or qualitative methodologies to address the issue from another angle.

7. Reliance on Instruments for Data Collection

In quantitative research, the collection of data heavily relies on instruments like questionnaires, surveys, or machines.

The limitation here is that the data you get is only as good as the instrument you’re using. If the instrument isn’t designed or calibrated well, your data can be flawed.

For instance, if you’re using a questionnaire to study customer satisfaction and the questions are vague, confusing, or biased, the responses may not accurately reflect the customers’ true feelings.

When discussing this limitation, you could say, “Our study depends on the use of questionnaires for data collection. Although we have put significant effort into designing and testing the instrument, it’s possible that inaccuracies or misunderstandings could potentially affect the validity of the data collected.”

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest future studies that will use different instruments but examine the same variables to triangulate results.

8. Time and Resource Constraints (Specific to Quantitative Research)

Quantitative research can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, especially when dealing with large samples.

It often involves systematic sampling, rigorous design, and sometimes complex statistical analysis.

If resources and time are limited, it can restrict the scale of your research, the techniques you can employ, or the extent of your data analysis.

For example, you may want to conduct a nationwide survey on public opinion about a certain policy. However, due to limited resources, you might only be able to survey people in one city.

When writing about this limitation, you could say, “Given the scope of our research and the resources available, we are limited to conducting our survey within one city, which may not fully represent the nationwide public opinion. Hence, the generalizability of the results may be limited.”

Suggested Solution and Response: Suggest future studies that will have more funding or longer timeframes.

How to Discuss Your Research Limitations

1. in your research proposal and methodology section.

In the research proposal, which will become the methodology section of your dissertation, I would recommend taking the four following steps, in order:

Be Explicit about your Scope – If you limit the scope of your study in your research question, aims, and objectives, then you can set yourself up well later in the methodology to say that certain questions are “outside the scope of the study.” For example, you may identify the fact that the study doesn’t address a certain variable, but you can follow up by stating that the research question is specifically focused on the variable that you are examining, so this limitation would need to be looked at in future studies.
Acknowledge the Limitation – Acknowledging the limitations of your study demonstrates reflexivity and humility and can make your research more reliable and valid. It also pre-empts questions the people grading your paper may have, so instead of them down-grading you for your limitations; they will congratulate you on explaining the limitations and how you have addressed them!
Explain your Decisions – You may have chosen your approach (despite its limitations) for a very specific reason. This might be because your approach remains, on balance, the best one to answer your research question. Or, it might be because of time and monetary constraints that are outside of your control.
Highlight the Strengths of your Approach – Conclude your limitations section by strongly demonstrating that, despite limitations, you’ve worked hard to minimize the effects of the limitations and that you have chosen your specific approach and methodology because it’s also got some terrific strengths. Name the strengths.

Overall, you’ll want to acknowledge your own limitations but also explain that the limitations don’t detract from the value of your study as it stands.

2. In the Conclusion Section or Chapter

In the conclusion of your study, it is generally expected that you return to a discussion of the study’s limitations. Here, I recommend the following steps:

Acknowledge issues faced – After completing your study, you will be increasingly aware of issues you may have faced that, if you re-did the study, you may have addressed earlier in order to avoid those issues. Acknowledge these issues as limitations, and frame them as recommendations for subsequent studies.
Suggest further research – Scholarly research aims to fill gaps in the current literature and knowledge. Having established your expertise through your study, suggest lines of inquiry for future researchers. You could state that your study had certain limitations, and “future studies” can address those limitations.
Suggest a mixed methods approach – Qualitative and quantitative research each have pros and cons. So, note those ‘cons’ of your approach, then say the next study should approach the topic using the opposite methodology or could approach it using a mixed-methods approach that could achieve the benefits of quantitative studies with the nuanced insights of associated qualitative insights as part of an in-study case-study.

Overall, be clear about both your limitations and how those limitations can inform future studies.

In sum, each type of research method has its own strengths and limitations. Qualitative research excels in exploring depth, context, and complexity, while quantitative research excels in examining breadth, generalizability, and quantifiable measures. Despite their individual limitations, each method contributes unique and valuable insights, and researchers often use them together to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon being studied.

Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative research , 1 (3), 385-405. ( Source )

Atkinson, P., Delamont, S., Cernat, A., Sakshaug, J., & Williams, R. A. (2021). SAGE research methods foundations . London: Sage Publications.

Clark, T., Foster, L., Bryman, A., & Sloan, L. (2021). Bryman’s social research methods . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Köhler, T., Smith, A., & Bhakoo, V. (2022). Templates in qualitative research methods: Origins, limitations, and new directions. Organizational Research Methods , 25 (2), 183-210. ( Source )

Lenger, A. (2019). The rejection of qualitative research methods in economics. Journal of Economic Issues , 53 (4), 946-965. ( Source )

Taherdoost, H. (2022). What are different research approaches? Comprehensive review of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method research, their applications, types, and limitations. Journal of Management Science & Engineering Research , 5 (1), 53-63. ( Source )

Walliman, N. (2021). Research methods: The basics . New York: Routledge.

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 5 Top Tips for Succeeding at University
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 50 Durable Goods Examples
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 100 Consumer Goods Examples
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 30 Globalization Pros and Cons

What are the limitations in research and how to write them?

Learn about the potential limitations in research and how to appropriately address them in order to deliver honest and ethical research.

It is fairly uncommon for researchers to stumble into the term research limitations when working on their research paper. Limitations in research can arise owing to constraints on design, methods, materials, and so on, and these aspects, unfortunately, may have an influence on your subject’s findings.

In this Mind The Graph’s article, we’ll discuss some recommendations for writing limitations in research , provide examples of various common types of limitations, and suggest how to properly present this information.

What are the limitations in research?

The limitations in research are the constraints in design, methods or even researchers’ limitations that affect and influence the interpretation of your research’s ultimate findings. These are limitations on the generalization and usability of findings that emerge from the design of the research and/or the method employed to ensure validity both internally and externally.

Researchers are usually cautious to acknowledge the limitations of their research in their publications for fear of undermining the research’s scientific validity. No research is faultless or covers every possible angle. As a result, addressing the constraints of your research exhibits honesty and integrity .

Why should include limitations of research in my paper?

Though limitations tackle potential flaws in research, commenting on them at the conclusion of your paper, by demonstrating that you are aware of these limitations and explaining how they impact the conclusions that may be taken from the research, improves your research by disclosing any issues before other researchers or reviewers do .

Additionally, emphasizing research constraints implies that you have thoroughly investigated the ramifications of research shortcomings and have a thorough understanding of your research problem.

Limits exist in any research; being honest about them and explaining them would impress researchers and reviewers more than disregarding them.

Remember that acknowledging a research’s shortcomings offers a chance to provide ideas for future research, but be careful to describe how your study may help to concentrate on these outstanding problems.

Possible limitations examples

Here are some limitations connected to methodology and the research procedure that you may need to explain and discuss in connection to your findings.

Methodological limitations

Sample size.

The number of units of analysis used in your study is determined by the sort of research issue being investigated. It is important to note that if your sample is too small, finding significant connections in the data will be challenging, as statistical tests typically require a larger sample size to ensure a fair representation and this can be limiting.

Lack of available or reliable data

A lack of data or trustworthy data will almost certainly necessitate limiting the scope of your research or the size of your sample, or it can be a substantial impediment to identifying a pattern and a relevant connection.

Lack of prior research on the subject

Citing previous research papers forms the basis of your literature review and aids in comprehending the research subject you are researching. Yet there may be little if any, past research on your issue.

The measure used to collect data

After finishing your analysis of the findings, you realize that the method you used to collect data limited your capacity to undertake a comprehensive evaluation of the findings. Recognize the flaw by mentioning that future researchers should change the specific approach for data collection.

Issues with research samples and selection

Sampling inaccuracies arise when a probability sampling method is employed to choose a sample, but that sample does not accurately represent the overall population or the relevant group. As a result, your study suffers from “sampling bias” or “selection bias.”

Limitations of the research

When your research requires polling certain persons or a specific group, you may have encountered the issue of limited access to these interviewees. Because of the limited access, you may need to reorganize or rearrange your research. In this scenario, explain why access is restricted and ensure that your findings are still trustworthy and valid despite the constraint.

Time constraints

Practical difficulties may limit the amount of time available to explore a research issue and monitor changes as they occur. If time restrictions have any detrimental influence on your research, recognize this impact by expressing the necessity for a future investigation.

Due to their cultural origins or opinions on observed events, researchers may carry biased opinions, which can influence the credibility of a research. Furthermore, researchers may exhibit biases toward data and conclusions that only support their hypotheses or arguments.

The structure of the limitations section

The limitations of your research are usually stated at the beginning of the discussion section of your paper so that the reader is aware of and comprehends the limitations prior to actually reading the rest of your findings, or they are stated at the end of the discussion section as an acknowledgment of the need for further research.

The ideal way is to divide your limitations section into three steps:

1. Identify the research constraints;

2. Describe in great detail how they affect your research;

3. Mention the opportunity for future investigations and give possibilities.

By following this method while addressing the constraints of your research, you will be able to effectively highlight your research’s shortcomings without jeopardizing the quality and integrity of your research.

Present your research or paper in an innovative way

If you want your readers to be engaged and participate in your research, try Mind The Graph tool to add visual assets to your content. Infographics may improve comprehension and are easy to read, just as the Mind The Graph tool is simple to use and offers a variety of templates from which you can select the one that best suits your information.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Unlock Your Creativity

Create infographics, presentations and other scientifically-accurate designs without hassle — absolutely free for 7 days!

About Jessica Abbadia

Jessica Abbadia is a lawyer that has been working in Digital Marketing since 2020, improving organic performance for apps and websites in various regions through ASO and SEO. Currently developing scientific and intellectual knowledge for the community's benefit. Jessica is an animal rights activist who enjoys reading and drinking strong coffee.

Content tags

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
Perspect Med Educ
v.8(4); 2019 Aug

Limited by our limitations

Paula t. ross.

Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI USA

Nikki L. Bibler Zaidi

Study limitations represent weaknesses within a research design that may influence outcomes and conclusions of the research. Researchers have an obligation to the academic community to present complete and honest limitations of a presented study. Too often, authors use generic descriptions to describe study limitations. Including redundant or irrelevant limitations is an ineffective use of the already limited word count. A meaningful presentation of study limitations should describe the potential limitation, explain the implication of the limitation, provide possible alternative approaches, and describe steps taken to mitigate the limitation. This includes placing research findings within their proper context to ensure readers do not overemphasize or minimize findings. A more complete presentation will enrich the readers’ understanding of the study’s limitations and support future investigation.

Introduction

Regardless of the format scholarship assumes, from qualitative research to clinical trials, all studies have limitations. Limitations represent weaknesses within the study that may influence outcomes and conclusions of the research. The goal of presenting limitations is to provide meaningful information to the reader; however, too often, limitations in medical education articles are overlooked or reduced to simplistic and minimally relevant themes (e.g., single institution study, use of self-reported data, or small sample size) [ 1 ]. This issue is prominent in other fields of inquiry in medicine as well. For example, despite the clinical implications, medical studies often fail to discuss how limitations could have affected the study findings and interpretations [ 2 ]. Further, observational research often fails to remind readers of the fundamental limitation inherent in the study design, which is the inability to attribute causation [ 3 ]. By reporting generic limitations or omitting them altogether, researchers miss opportunities to fully communicate the relevance of their work, illustrate how their work advances a larger field under study, and suggest potential areas for further investigation.

Goals of presenting limitations

Medical education scholarship should provide empirical evidence that deepens our knowledge and understanding of education [ 4 , 5 ], informs educational practice and process, [ 6 , 7 ] and serves as a forum for educating other researchers [ 8 ]. Providing study limitations is indeed an important part of this scholarly process. Without them, research consumers are pressed to fully grasp the potential exclusion areas or other biases that may affect the results and conclusions provided [ 9 ]. Study limitations should leave the reader thinking about opportunities to engage in prospective improvements [ 9 – 11 ] by presenting gaps in the current research and extant literature, thereby cultivating other researchers’ curiosity and interest in expanding the line of scholarly inquiry [ 9 ].

Presenting study limitations is also an ethical element of scientific inquiry [ 12 ]. It ensures transparency of both the research and the researchers [ 10 , 13 , 14 ], as well as provides transferability [ 15 ] and reproducibility of methods. Presenting limitations also supports proper interpretation and validity of the findings [ 16 ]. A study’s limitations should place research findings within their proper context to ensure readers are fully able to discern the credibility of a study’s conclusion, and can generalize findings appropriately [ 16 ].

Why some authors may fail to present limitations

As Price and Murnan [ 8 ] note, there may be overriding reasons why researchers do not sufficiently report the limitations of their study. For example, authors may not fully understand the importance and implications of their study’s limitations or assume that not discussing them may increase the likelihood of publication. Word limits imposed by journals may also prevent authors from providing thorough descriptions of their study’s limitations [ 17 ]. Still another possible reason for excluding limitations is a diffusion of responsibility in which some authors may incorrectly assume that the journal editor is responsible for identifying limitations. Regardless of reason or intent, researchers have an obligation to the academic community to present complete and honest study limitations.

A guide to presenting limitations

The presentation of limitations should describe the potential limitations, explain the implication of the limitations, provide possible alternative approaches, and describe steps taken to mitigate the limitations. Too often, authors only list the potential limitations, without including these other important elements.

Describe the limitations

When describing limitations authors should identify the limitation type to clearly introduce the limitation and specify the origin of the limitation. This helps to ensure readers are able to interpret and generalize findings appropriately. Here we outline various limitation types that can occur at different stages of the research process.

Study design

Some study limitations originate from conscious choices made by the researcher (also known as delimitations) to narrow the scope of the study [ 1 , 8 , 18 ]. For example, the researcher may have designed the study for a particular age group, sex, race, ethnicity, geographically defined region, or some other attribute that would limit to whom the findings can be generalized. Such delimitations involve conscious exclusionary and inclusionary decisions made during the development of the study plan, which may represent a systematic bias intentionally introduced into the study design or instrument by the researcher [ 8 ]. The clear description and delineation of delimitations and limitations will assist editors and reviewers in understanding any methodological issues.

Data collection

Study limitations can also be introduced during data collection. An unintentional consequence of human subjects research is the potential of the researcher to influence how participants respond to their questions. Even when appropriate methods for sampling have been employed, some studies remain limited by the use of data collected only from participants who decided to enrol in the study (self-selection bias) [ 11 , 19 ]. In some cases, participants may provide biased input by responding to questions they believe are favourable to the researcher rather than their authentic response (social desirability bias) [ 20 – 22 ]. Participants may influence the data collected by changing their behaviour when they are knowingly being observed (Hawthorne effect) [ 23 ]. Researchers—in their role as an observer—may also bias the data they collect by allowing a first impression of the participant to be influenced by a single characteristic or impression of another characteristic either unfavourably (horns effect) or favourably (halo effort) [ 24 ].

Data analysis

Study limitations may arise as a consequence of the type of statistical analysis performed. Some studies may not follow the basic tenets of inferential statistical analyses when they use convenience sampling (i.e. non-probability sampling) rather than employing probability sampling from a target population [ 19 ]. Another limitation that can arise during statistical analyses occurs when studies employ unplanned post-hoc data analyses that were not specified before the initial analysis [ 25 ]. Unplanned post-hoc analysis may lead to statistical relationships that suggest associations but are no more than coincidental findings [ 23 ]. Therefore, when unplanned post-hoc analyses are conducted, this should be clearly stated to allow the reader to make proper interpretation and conclusions—especially when only a subset of the original sample is investigated [ 23 ].

Study results

The limitations of any research study will be rooted in the validity of its results—specifically threats to internal or external validity [ 8 ]. Internal validity refers to reliability or accuracy of the study results [ 26 ], while external validity pertains to the generalizability of results from the study’s sample to the larger, target population [ 8 ].

Examples of threats to internal validity include: effects of events external to the study (history), changes in participants due to time instead of the studied effect (maturation), systematic reduction in participants related to a feature of the study (attrition), changes in participant responses due to repeatedly measuring participants (testing effect), modifications to the instrument (instrumentality) and selecting participants based on extreme scores that will regress towards the mean in repeat tests (regression to the mean) [ 27 ].

Threats to external validity include factors that might inhibit generalizability of results from the study’s sample to the larger, target population [ 8 , 27 ]. External validity is challenged when results from a study cannot be generalized to its larger population or to similar populations in terms of the context, setting, participants and time [ 18 ]. Therefore, limitations should be made transparent in the results to inform research consumers of any known or potentially hidden biases that may have affected the study and prevent generalization beyond the study parameters.

Explain the implication(s) of each limitation

Authors should include the potential impact of the limitations (e.g., likelihood, magnitude) [ 13 ] as well as address specific validity implications of the results and subsequent conclusions [ 16 , 28 ]. For example, self-reported data may lead to inaccuracies (e.g. due to social desirability bias) which threatens internal validity [ 19 ]. Even a researcher’s inappropriate attribution to a characteristic or outcome (e.g., stereotyping) can overemphasize (either positively or negatively) unrelated characteristics or outcomes (halo or horns effect) and impact the internal validity [ 24 ]. Participants’ awareness that they are part of a research study can also influence outcomes (Hawthorne effect) and limit external validity of findings [ 23 ]. External validity may also be threatened should the respondents’ propensity for participation be correlated with the substantive topic of study, as data will be biased and not represent the population of interest (self-selection bias) [ 29 ]. Having this explanation helps readers interpret the results and generalize the applicability of the results for their own setting.

Provide potential alternative approaches and explanations

Often, researchers use other studies’ limitations as the first step in formulating new research questions and shaping the next phase of research. Therefore, it is important for readers to understand why potential alternative approaches (e.g. approaches taken by others exploring similar topics) were not taken. In addition to alternative approaches, authors can also present alternative explanations for their own study’s findings [ 13 ]. This information is valuable coming from the researcher because of the direct, relevant experience and insight gained as they conducted the study. The presentation of alternative approaches represents a major contribution to the scholarly community.

Describe steps taken to minimize each limitation

No research design is perfect and free from explicit and implicit biases; however various methods can be employed to minimize the impact of study limitations. Some suggested steps to mitigate or minimize the limitations mentioned above include using neutral questions, randomized response technique, force choice items, or self-administered questionnaires to reduce respondents’ discomfort when answering sensitive questions (social desirability bias) [ 21 ]; using unobtrusive data collection measures (e.g., use of secondary data) that do not require the researcher to be present (Hawthorne effect) [ 11 , 30 ]; using standardized rubrics and objective assessment forms with clearly defined scoring instructions to minimize researcher bias, or making rater adjustments to assessment scores to account for rater tendencies (halo or horns effect) [ 24 ]; or using existing data or control groups (self-selection bias) [ 11 , 30 ]. When appropriate, researchers should provide sufficient evidence that demonstrates the steps taken to mitigate limitations as part of their study design [ 13 ].

In conclusion, authors may be limiting the impact of their research by neglecting or providing abbreviated and generic limitations. We present several examples of limitations to consider; however, this should not be considered an exhaustive list nor should these examples be added to the growing list of generic and overused limitations. Instead, careful thought should go into presenting limitations after research has concluded and the major findings have been described. Limitations help focus the reader on key findings, therefore it is important to only address the most salient limitations of the study [ 17 , 28 ] related to the specific research problem, not general limitations of most studies [ 1 ]. It is important not to minimize the limitations of study design or results. Rather, results, including their limitations, must help readers draw connections between current research and the extant literature.

The quality and rigor of our research is largely defined by our limitations [ 31 ]. In fact, one of the top reasons reviewers report recommending acceptance of medical education research manuscripts involves limitations—specifically how the study’s interpretation accounts for its limitations [ 32 ]. Therefore, it is not only best for authors to acknowledge their study’s limitations rather than to have them identified by an editor or reviewer, but proper framing and presentation of limitations can actually increase the likelihood of acceptance. Perhaps, these issues could be ameliorated if academic and research organizations adopted policies and/or expectations to guide authors in proper description of limitations.

Writing Limitations of Research Study — 4 Reasons Why It Is Important!

It is not unusual for researchers to come across the term limitations of research during their academic paper writing. More often this is interpreted as something terrible. However, when it comes to research study, limitations can help structure the research study better. Therefore, do not underestimate significance of limitations of research study.

Allow us to take you through the context of how to evaluate the limits of your research and conclude an impactful relevance to your results.

Table of Contents

What Are the Limitations of a Research Study?

Every research has its limit and these limitations arise due to restrictions in methodology or research design. This could impact your entire research or the research paper you wish to publish. Unfortunately, most researchers choose not to discuss their limitations of research fearing it will affect the value of their article in the eyes of readers.

However, it is very important to discuss your study limitations and show it to your target audience (other researchers, journal editors, peer reviewers etc.). It is very important that you provide an explanation of how your research limitations may affect the conclusions and opinions drawn from your research. Moreover, when as an author you state the limitations of research, it shows that you have investigated all the weaknesses of your study and have a deep understanding of the subject. Being honest could impress your readers and mark your study as a sincere effort in research.

Why and Where Should You Include the Research Limitations?

The main goal of your research is to address your research objectives. Conduct experiments, get results and explain those results, and finally justify your research question . It is best to mention the limitations of research in the discussion paragraph of your research article.

At the very beginning of this paragraph, immediately after highlighting the strengths of the research methodology, you should write down your limitations. You can discuss specific points from your research limitations as suggestions for further research in the conclusion of your thesis.

1. Common Limitations of the Researchers

Limitations that are related to the researcher must be mentioned. This will help you gain transparency with your readers. Furthermore, you could provide suggestions on decreasing these limitations in you and your future studies.

2. Limited Access to Information

Your work may involve some institutions and individuals in research, and sometimes you may have problems accessing these institutions. Therefore, you need to redesign and rewrite your work. You must explain your readers the reason for limited access.

3. Limited Time

All researchers are bound by their deadlines when it comes to completing their studies. Sometimes, time constraints can affect your research negatively. However, the best practice is to acknowledge it and mention a requirement for future study to solve the research problem in a better way.

4. Conflict over Biased Views and Personal Issues

Biased views can affect the research. In fact, researchers end up choosing only those results and data that support their main argument, keeping aside the other loose ends of the research.

Types of Limitations of Research

Before beginning your research study, know that there are certain limitations to what you are testing or possible research results. There are different types that researchers may encounter, and they all have unique characteristics, such as:

1. Research Design Limitations

Certain restrictions on your research or available procedures may affect your final results or research outputs. You may have formulated research goals and objectives too broadly. However, this can help you understand how you can narrow down the formulation of research goals and objectives, thereby increasing the focus of your study.

2. Impact Limitations

Even if your research has excellent statistics and a strong design, it can suffer from the influence of the following factors:

Presence of increasing findings as researched
Being population specific
A strong regional focus.

3. Data or statistical limitations

In some cases, it is impossible to collect sufficient data for research or very difficult to get access to the data. This could lead to incomplete conclusion to your study. Moreover, this insufficiency in data could be the outcome of your study design. The unclear, shabby research outline could produce more problems in interpreting your findings.

How to Correctly Structure Your Research Limitations?

There are strict guidelines for narrowing down research questions, wherein you could justify and explain potential weaknesses of your academic paper. You could go through these basic steps to get a well-structured clarity of research limitations:

Declare that you wish to identify your limitations of research and explain their importance,
Provide the necessary depth, explain their nature, and justify your study choices.
Write how you are suggesting that it is possible to overcome them in the future.

In this section, your readers will see that you are aware of the potential weaknesses in your business, understand them and offer effective solutions, and it will positively strengthen your article as you clarify all limitations of research to your target audience.

Know that you cannot be perfect and there is no individual without flaws. You could use the limitations of research as a great opportunity to take on a new challenge and improve the future of research. In a typical academic paper, research limitations may relate to:

1. Formulating your goals and objectives

If you formulate goals and objectives too broadly, your work will have some shortcomings. In this case, specify effective methods or ways to narrow down the formula of goals and aim to increase your level of study focus.

2. Application of your data collection methods in research

If you do not have experience in primary data collection, there is a risk that there will be flaws in the implementation of your methods. It is necessary to accept this, and learn and educate yourself to understand data collection methods.

3. Sample sizes

This depends on the nature of problem you choose. Sample size is of a greater importance in quantitative studies as opposed to qualitative ones. If your sample size is too small, statistical tests cannot identify significant relationships or connections within a given data set.

You could point out that other researchers should base the same study on a larger sample size to get more accurate results.

4. The absence of previous studies in the field you have chosen

Writing a literature review is an important step in any scientific study because it helps researchers determine the scope of current work in the chosen field. It is a major foundation for any researcher who must use them to achieve a set of specific goals or objectives.

However, if you are focused on the most current and evolving research problem or a very narrow research problem, there may be very little prior research on your topic. For example, if you chose to explore the role of Bitcoin as the currency of the future, you may not find tons of scientific papers addressing the research problem as Bitcoins are only a new phenomenon.

It is important that you learn to identify research limitations examples at each step. Whatever field you choose, feel free to add the shortcoming of your work. This is mainly because you do not have many years of experience writing scientific papers or completing complex work. Therefore, the depth and scope of your discussions may be compromised at different levels compared to academics with a lot of expertise. Include specific points from limitations of research. Use them as suggestions for the future.

Have you ever faced a challenge of writing the limitations of research study in your paper? How did you overcome it? What ways did you follow? Were they beneficial? Let us know in the comments below!

Frequently Asked Questions

Setting limitations in our study helps to clarify the outcomes drawn from our research and enhance understanding of the subject. Moreover, it shows that the author has investigated all the weaknesses in the study.

Scope is the range and limitations of a research project which are set to define the boundaries of a project. Limitations are the impacts on the overall study due to the constraints on the research design.

Limitation in research is an impact of a constraint on the research design in the overall study. They are the flaws or weaknesses in the study, which may influence the outcome of the research.

1. Limitations in research can be written as follows: Formulate your goals and objectives 2. Analyze the chosen data collection method and the sample sizes 3. Identify your limitations of research and explain their importance 4. Provide the necessary depth, explain their nature, and justify your study choices 5. Write how you are suggesting that it is possible to overcome them in the future

Excellent article ,,,it has helped me big

This is very helpful information. It has given me an insight on how to go about my study limitations.

Good comments and helpful

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

what are limitations of a research study

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

Diversity and Inclusion
Trending Now

The Silent Struggle: Confronting gender bias in science funding

In the 1990s, Dr. Katalin Kariko’s pioneering mRNA research seemed destined for obscurity, doomed by…

Promoting Research

Plain Language Summary — Communicating your research to bridge the academic-lay gap

Science can be complex, but does that mean it should not be accessible to the…

Addressing Barriers in Academia: Navigating unconscious biases in the Ph.D. journey

In the journey of academia, a Ph.D. marks a transitional phase, like that of a…

Manuscripts & Grants
Reporting Research

Unraveling Research Population and Sample: Understanding their role in statistical inference

Research population and sample serve as the cornerstones of any scientific inquiry. They hold the…

Manuscript Preparation
Publishing Research

Research Problem Statement — Find out how to write an impactful one!

What Is a Research Problem Statement? A research problem statement is a clear, concise, and…

How to Develop a Good Research Question? — Types & Examples

5 Effective Ways to Avoid Ghostwriting for Busy Researchers

Top 5 Key Differences Between Methods and Methodology

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:

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

How to present limitations in research

Last updated

30 January 2024

Reviewed by

Limitations don’t invalidate or diminish your results, but it’s best to acknowledge them. This will enable you to address any questions your study failed to answer because of them.

In this guide, learn how to recognize, present, and overcome limitations in research.

What is a research limitation?

Research limitations are weaknesses in your research design or execution that may have impacted outcomes and conclusions. Uncovering limitations doesn’t necessarily indicate poor research design—it just means you encountered challenges you couldn’t have anticipated that limited your research efforts.

Does basic research have limitations?

Basic research aims to provide more information about your research topic. It requires the same standard research methodology and data collection efforts as any other research type, and it can also have limitations.

Common research limitations

Researchers encounter common limitations when embarking on a study. Limitations can occur in relation to the methods you apply or the research process you design. They could also be connected to you as the researcher.

Methodology limitations

Not having access to data or reliable information can impact the methods used to facilitate your research. A lack of data or reliability may limit the parameters of your study area and the extent of your exploration.

Your sample size may also be affected because you won’t have any direction on how big or small it should be and who or what you should include. Having too few participants won’t adequately represent the population or groups of people needed to draw meaningful conclusions.

Research process limitations

The study’s design can impose constraints on the process. For example, as you’re conducting the research, issues may arise that don’t conform to the data collection methodology you developed. You may not realize until well into the process that you should have incorporated more specific questions or comprehensive experiments to generate the data you need to have confidence in your results.

Constraints on resources can also have an impact. Being limited on participants or participation incentives may limit your sample sizes. Insufficient tools, equipment, and materials to conduct a thorough study may also be a factor.

Common researcher limitations

Here are some of the common researcher limitations you may encounter:

Time: some research areas require multi-year longitudinal approaches, but you might not be able to dedicate that much time. Imagine you want to measure how much memory a person loses as they age. This may involve conducting multiple tests on a sample of participants over 20–30 years, which may be impossible.

Bias: researchers can consciously or unconsciously apply bias to their research. Biases can contribute to relying on research sources and methodologies that will only support your beliefs about the research you’re embarking on. You might also omit relevant issues or participants from the scope of your study because of your biases.

Limited access to data : you may need to pay to access specific databases or journals that would be helpful to your research process. You might also need to gain information from certain people or organizations but have limited access to them. These cases require readjusting your process and explaining why your findings are still reliable.

Why is it important to identify limitations?

Identifying limitations adds credibility to research and provides a deeper understanding of how you arrived at your conclusions.

Constraints may have prevented you from collecting specific data or information you hoped would prove or disprove your hypothesis or provide a more comprehensive understanding of your research topic.

However, identifying the limitations contributing to your conclusions can inspire further research efforts that help gather more substantial information and data.

Where to put limitations in a research paper

A research paper is broken up into different sections that appear in the following order:

Introduction

Methodology

The discussion portion of your paper explores your findings and puts them in the context of the overall research. Either place research limitations at the beginning of the discussion section before the analysis of your findings or at the end of the section to indicate that further research needs to be pursued.

What not to include in the limitations section

Evidence that doesn’t support your hypothesis is not a limitation, so you shouldn’t include it in the limitation section. Don’t just list limitations and their degree of severity without further explanation.

How to present limitations

You’ll want to present the limitations of your study in a way that doesn’t diminish the validity of your research and leave the reader wondering if your results and conclusions have been compromised.

Include only the limitations that directly relate to and impact how you addressed your research questions. Following a specific format enables the reader to develop an understanding of the weaknesses within the context of your findings without doubting the quality and integrity of your research.

Identify the limitations specific to your study

You don’t have to identify every possible limitation that might have occurred during your research process. Only identify those that may have influenced the quality of your findings and your ability to answer your research question.

Explain study limitations in detail

This explanation should be the most significant portion of your limitation section.

Link each limitation with an interpretation and appraisal of their impact on the study. You’ll have to evaluate and explain whether the error, method, or validity issues influenced the study’s outcome and how.

Propose a direction for future studies and present alternatives

In this section, suggest how researchers can avoid the pitfalls you experienced during your research process.

If an issue with methodology was a limitation, propose alternate methods that may help with a smoother and more conclusive research project. Discuss the pros and cons of your alternate recommendation.

Describe steps taken to minimize each limitation

You probably took steps to try to address or mitigate limitations when you noticed them throughout the course of your research project. Describe these steps in the limitation section.

Limitation example

“Approaches like stem cell transplantation and vaccination in AD [Alzheimer’s disease] work on a cellular or molecular level in the laboratory. However, translation into clinical settings will remain a challenge for the next decade.”

The authors are saying that even though these methods showed promise in helping people with memory loss when conducted in the lab (in other words, using animal studies), more studies are needed. These may be controlled clinical trials, for example.

However, the short life span of stem cells outside the lab and the vaccination’s severe inflammatory side effects are limitations. Researchers won’t be able to conduct clinical trials until these issues are overcome.

How to overcome limitations in research

You’ve already started on the road to overcoming limitations in research by acknowledging that they exist. However, you need to ensure readers don’t mistake weaknesses for errors within your research design.

To do this, you’ll need to justify and explain your rationale for the methods, research design, and analysis tools you chose and how you noticed they may have presented limitations.

Your readers need to know that even when limitations presented themselves, you followed best practices and the ethical standards of your field. You didn’t violate any rules and regulations during your research process.

You’ll also want to reinforce the validity of your conclusions and results with multiple sources, methods, and perspectives. This prevents readers from assuming your findings were derived from a single or biased source.

Learning and improving starts with limitations in research

Dealing with limitations with transparency and integrity helps identify areas for future improvements and developments. It’s a learning process, providing valuable insights into how you can improve methodologies, expand sample sizes, or explore alternate approaches to further support the validity of your findings.

Get started today

Go from raw data to valuable insights with a flexible research platform

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 21 December 2023

Last updated: 16 December 2023

Last updated: 6 October 2023

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 25 November 2023

Last updated: 15 February 2024

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 10 April 2023

Last updated: 20 December 2023

Latest articles

Research Limitations: A Comprehensive Guide

Embarking on a research journey is an exciting endeavor, but every study has its boundaries and constraints. Understanding and transparently acknowledging these limitations is a crucial aspect of scholarly work. In this guide, we'll explore the concept of research limitations, why they matter, and how to effectively address and navigate them in your academic endeavors.

1. Defining Research Limitations:

Definition: Research limitations are the constraints or shortcomings that affect the scope, applicability, and generalizability of a study.
Inherent in Research: Every research project, regardless of its scale or significance, possesses limitations.

2. Types of Research Limitations:

Methodological Limitations: Constraints related to the research design, data collection methods, or analytical techniques.
Sampling Limitations: Issues associated with the representativeness or size of the study sample.
Contextual Limitations: Restrictions stemming from the specific time, place, or cultural context of the study.
Resource Limitations: Constraints related to time, budget, or access to necessary resources.

3. Why Acknowledge Limitations?

Transparency: Acknowledging limitations demonstrates transparency and honesty in your research.
Robustness of Findings: Recognizing limitations adds nuance to your findings, making them more robust.
Future Research Directions: Addressing limitations provides a foundation for future researchers to build upon.

4. Identifying Research Limitations:

Reflect on Methodology: Consider the strengths and weaknesses of your research design, data collection methods, and analysis.
Examine Sample Characteristics: Evaluate the representativeness and size of your study sample.
Consider External Factors: Assess external factors that may impact the generalizability of your findings.

5. How to Address Limitations:

In the Methodology Section: Clearly articulate limitations in the methodology section of your research paper.
Offer Solutions: If possible, propose ways to mitigate or address identified limitations.
Future Research Suggestions: Use limitations as a springboard to suggest areas for future research.

6. Common Phrases to Express Limitations:

"This study is not without limitations."
"One limitation of our research is..."
"It is important to acknowledge the constraints of this study, including..."

7. Examples of Addressing Limitations:

Example 1 (Methodological): "While our survey provided valuable insights, the reliance on self-reported data introduces the possibility of response bias."
Example 2 (Sampling): "The small sample size of our study limits the generalizability of our findings to a broader population."
Example 3 (Resource): "Due to budget constraints, our research was limited to a single geographical location, potentially impacting the external validity."

8. Balancing Strengths and Limitations:

Emphasize Contributions: Highlight the contributions and strengths of your research alongside the limitations.
Maintain a Positive Tone: Discuss limitations objectively without undermining the significance of your study.

9. Feedback and Peer Review:

Seek Feedback: Share your research with peers or mentors to gain valuable insights.
Peer Review: Embrace the feedback received during the peer-review process to enhance the robustness of your work.

10. Continuous Reflection:

Throughout the Research Process: Continuously reflect on potential limitations during the entire research process.
Adjust as Needed: Be willing to adjust your approach as you encounter unforeseen challenges.

Conclusion:

Understanding and effectively addressing research limitations is a hallmark of rigorous and responsible scholarship. By openly acknowledging these constraints, you not only enhance the credibility of your work but also contribute to the broader academic discourse. Embrace the nuances of your research journey, navigate its limitations thoughtfully, and pave the way for future investigations.

Related Guides

How to Write the Abstract of Your Research Paper?
Research Methods : A Comprehensive Guide
The Art of Wringing a Research Conclusion
Tips for Avoiding Plagiarism
Quantitative Research Methods
Analyze and Discuss Your Research Findings Like a Pro

Affiliate Program

UNITED STATES
台灣 (TAIWAN)
TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
Academic Editing Services
- Research Paper
- Journal Manuscript
- Dissertation
- College & University Assignments
Admissions Editing Services
- Application Essay
- Personal Statement
- Recommendation Letter
- Cover Letter
- CV/Resume
Business Editing Services
- Business Documents
- Report & Brochure
- Website & Blog
Writer Editing Services
- Script & Screenplay
Our Editors
Client Reviews
Editing & Proofreading Prices
Wordvice Points
Partner Discount
Plagiarism Checker

APA Citation Generator

MLA Citation Generator

Chicago Citation Generator

Vancouver Citation Generator

- APA Style
- MLA Style
- Chicago Style
- Vancouver Style
Writing & Editing Guide
Academic Resources
Admissions Resources

How to Present the Limitations of the Study Examples

What are the limitations of a study?

The limitations of a study are the elements of methodology or study design that impact the interpretation of your research results. The limitations essentially detail any flaws or shortcomings in your study. Study limitations can exist due to constraints on research design, methodology, materials, etc., and these factors may impact the findings of your study. However, researchers are often reluctant to discuss the limitations of their study in their papers, feeling that bringing up limitations may undermine its research value in the eyes of readers and reviewers.

In spite of the impact it might have (and perhaps because of it) you should clearly acknowledge any limitations in your research paper in order to show readers—whether journal editors, other researchers, or the general public—that you are aware of these limitations and to explain how they affect the conclusions that can be drawn from the research.

In this article, we provide some guidelines for writing about research limitations, show examples of some frequently seen study limitations, and recommend techniques for presenting this information. And after you have finished drafting and have received manuscript editing for your work, you still might want to follow this up with academic editing before submitting your work to your target journal.

Why do I need to include limitations of research in my paper?

Although limitations address the potential weaknesses of a study, writing about them toward the end of your paper actually strengthens your study by identifying any problems before other researchers or reviewers find them.

Furthermore, pointing out study limitations shows that you’ve considered the impact of research weakness thoroughly and have an in-depth understanding of your research topic. Since all studies face limitations, being honest and detailing these limitations will impress researchers and reviewers more than ignoring them.

limitations of the study examples, brick wall with blue sky

Where should I put the limitations of the study in my paper?

Some limitations might be evident to researchers before the start of the study, while others might become clear while you are conducting the research. Whether these limitations are anticipated or not, and whether they are due to research design or to methodology, they should be clearly identified and discussed in the discussion section —the final section of your paper. Most journals now require you to include a discussion of potential limitations of your work, and many journals now ask you to place this “limitations section” at the very end of your article.

Some journals ask you to also discuss the strengths of your work in this section, and some allow you to freely choose where to include that information in your discussion section—make sure to always check the author instructions of your target journal before you finalize a manuscript and submit it for peer review .

Limitations of the Study Examples

There are several reasons why limitations of research might exist. The two main categories of limitations are those that result from the methodology and those that result from issues with the researcher(s).

Common Methodological Limitations of Studies

Limitations of research due to methodological problems can be addressed by clearly and directly identifying the potential problem and suggesting ways in which this could have been addressed—and SHOULD be addressed in future studies. The following are some major potential methodological issues that can impact the conclusions researchers can draw from the research.

Issues with research samples and selection

Sampling errors occur when a probability sampling method is used to select a sample, but that sample does not reflect the general population or appropriate population concerned. This results in limitations of your study known as “sample bias” or “selection bias.”

For example, if you conducted a survey to obtain your research results, your samples (participants) were asked to respond to the survey questions. However, you might have had limited ability to gain access to the appropriate type or geographic scope of participants. In this case, the people who responded to your survey questions may not truly be a random sample.

Insufficient sample size for statistical measurements

When conducting a study, it is important to have a sufficient sample size in order to draw valid conclusions. The larger the sample, the more precise your results will be. If your sample size is too small, it will be difficult to identify significant relationships in the data.

Normally, statistical tests require a larger sample size to ensure that the sample is considered representative of a population and that the statistical result can be generalized to a larger population. It is a good idea to understand how to choose an appropriate sample size before you conduct your research by using scientific calculation tools—in fact, many journals now require such estimation to be included in every manuscript that is sent out for review.

Lack of previous research studies on the topic

Citing and referencing prior research studies constitutes the basis of the literature review for your thesis or study, and these prior studies provide the theoretical foundations for the research question you are investigating. However, depending on the scope of your research topic, prior research studies that are relevant to your thesis might be limited.

When there is very little or no prior research on a specific topic, you may need to develop an entirely new research typology. In this case, discovering a limitation can be considered an important opportunity to identify literature gaps and to present the need for further development in the area of study.

Methods/instruments/techniques used to collect the data

After you complete your analysis of the research findings (in the discussion section), you might realize that the manner in which you have collected the data or the ways in which you have measured variables has limited your ability to conduct a thorough analysis of the results.

For example, you might realize that you should have addressed your survey questions from another viable perspective, or that you were not able to include an important question in the survey. In these cases, you should acknowledge the deficiency or deficiencies by stating a need for future researchers to revise their specific methods for collecting data that includes these missing elements.

Common Limitations of the Researcher(s)

Study limitations that arise from situations relating to the researcher or researchers (whether the direct fault of the individuals or not) should also be addressed and dealt with, and remedies to decrease these limitations—both hypothetically in your study, and practically in future studies—should be proposed.

Limited access to data

If your research involved surveying certain people or organizations, you might have faced the problem of having limited access to these respondents. Due to this limited access, you might need to redesign or restructure your research in a different way. In this case, explain the reasons for limited access and be sure that your finding is still reliable and valid despite this limitation.

Time constraints

Just as students have deadlines to turn in their class papers, academic researchers might also have to meet deadlines for submitting a manuscript to a journal or face other time constraints related to their research (e.g., participants are only available during a certain period; funding runs out; collaborators move to a new institution). The time available to study a research problem and to measure change over time might be constrained by such practical issues. If time constraints negatively impacted your study in any way, acknowledge this impact by mentioning a need for a future study (e.g., a longitudinal study) to answer this research problem.

Conflicts arising from cultural bias and other personal issues

Researchers might hold biased views due to their cultural backgrounds or perspectives of certain phenomena, and this can affect a study’s legitimacy. Also, it is possible that researchers will have biases toward data and results that only support their hypotheses or arguments. In order to avoid these problems, the author(s) of a study should examine whether the way the research problem was stated and the data-gathering process was carried out appropriately.

Steps for Organizing Your Study Limitations Section

When you discuss the limitations of your study, don’t simply list and describe your limitations—explain how these limitations have influenced your research findings. There might be multiple limitations in your study, but you only need to point out and explain those that directly relate to and impact how you address your research questions.

We suggest that you divide your limitations section into three steps: (1) identify the study limitations; (2) explain how they impact your study in detail; and (3) propose a direction for future studies and present alternatives. By following this sequence when discussing your study’s limitations, you will be able to clearly demonstrate your study’s weakness without undermining the quality and integrity of your research.

Step 1. Identify the limitation(s) of the study

This part should comprise around 10%-20% of your discussion of study limitations.

The first step is to identify the particular limitation(s) that affected your study. There are many possible limitations of research that can affect your study, but you don’t need to write a long review of all possible study limitations. A 200-500 word critique is an appropriate length for a research limitations section. In the beginning of this section, identify what limitations your study has faced and how important these limitations are.

You only need to identify limitations that had the greatest potential impact on: (1) the quality of your findings, and (2) your ability to answer your research question.

Step 2. Explain these study limitations in detail

This part should comprise around 60-70% of your discussion of limitations.

After identifying your research limitations, it’s time to explain the nature of the limitations and how they potentially impacted your study. For example, when you conduct quantitative research, a lack of probability sampling is an important issue that you should mention. On the other hand, when you conduct qualitative research, the inability to generalize the research findings could be an issue that deserves mention.

Explain the role these limitations played on the results and implications of the research and justify the choice you made in using this “limiting” methodology or other action in your research. Also, make sure that these limitations didn’t undermine the quality of your dissertation .

Step 3. Propose a direction for future studies and present alternatives (optional)

This part should comprise around 10-20% of your discussion of limitations.

After acknowledging the limitations of the research, you need to discuss some possible ways to overcome these limitations in future studies. One way to do this is to present alternative methodologies and ways to avoid issues with, or “fill in the gaps of” the limitations of this study you have presented. Discuss both the pros and cons of these alternatives and clearly explain why researchers should choose these approaches.

Make sure you are current on approaches used by prior studies and the impacts they have had on their findings. Cite review articles or scientific bodies that have recommended these approaches and why. This might be evidence in support of the approach you chose, or it might be the reason you consider your choices to be included as limitations. This process can act as a justification for your approach and a defense of your decision to take it while acknowledging the feasibility of other approaches.

P hrases and Tips for Introducing Your Study Limitations in the Discussion Section

The following phrases are frequently used to introduce the limitations of the study:

“There may be some possible limitations in this study.”
“The findings of this study have to be seen in light of some limitations.”
“The first is the…The second limitation concerns the…”
“The empirical results reported herein should be considered in the light of some limitations.”
“This research, however, is subject to several limitations.”
“The primary limitation to the generalization of these results is…”
“Nonetheless, these results must be interpreted with caution and a number of limitations should be borne in mind.”
“As with the majority of studies, the design of the current study is subject to limitations.”
“There are two major limitations in this study that could be addressed in future research. First, the study focused on …. Second ….”

For more articles on research writing and the journal submissions and publication process, visit Wordvice’s Academic Resources page.

And be sure to receive professional English editing and proofreading services , including paper editing services , for your journal manuscript before submitting it to journal editors.

Wordvice Resources

Proofreading & Editing Guide

Writing the Results Section for a Research Paper

How to Write a Literature Review

Research Writing Tips: How to Draft a Powerful Discussion Section

How to Captivate Journal Readers with a Strong Introduction

Tips That Will Make Your Abstract a Success!

APA In-Text Citation Guide for Research Writing

Additional Resources

Diving Deeper into Limitations and Delimitations (PhD student)
Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Limitations of the Study (USC Library)
Research Limitations (Research Methodology)
How to Present Limitations and Alternatives (UMASS)

Article References

Pearson-Stuttard, J., Kypridemos, C., Collins, B., Mozaffarian, D., Huang, Y., Bandosz, P.,…Micha, R. (2018). Estimating the health and economic effects of the proposed US Food and Drug Administration voluntary sodium reformulation: Microsimulation cost-effectiveness analysis. PLOS. https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002551

Xu, W.L, Pedersen, N.L., Keller, L., Kalpouzos, G., Wang, H.X., Graff, C,. Fratiglioni, L. (2015). HHEX_23 AA Genotype Exacerbates Effect of Diabetes on Dementia and Alzheimer Disease: A Population-Based Longitudinal Study. PLOS. Retrieved from https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001853

Stating the Obvious: Writing Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations

During the process of writing your thesis or dissertation, you might suddenly realize that your research has inherent flaws. Don’t worry! Virtually all projects contain restrictions to your research. However, being able to recognize and accurately describe these problems is the difference between a true researcher and a grade-school kid with a science-fair project. Concerns with truthful responding, access to participants, and survey instruments are just a few of examples of restrictions on your research. In the following sections, the differences among delimitations, limitations, and assumptions of a dissertation will be clarified.

Delimitations

Delimitations are the definitions you set as the boundaries of your own thesis or dissertation, so delimitations are in your control. Delimitations are set so that your goals do not become impossibly large to complete. Examples of delimitations include objectives, research questions, variables, theoretical objectives that you have adopted, and populations chosen as targets to study. When you are stating your delimitations, clearly inform readers why you chose this course of study. The answer might simply be that you were curious about the topic and/or wanted to improve standards of a professional field by revealing certain findings. In any case, you should clearly list the other options available and the reasons why you did not choose these options immediately after you list your delimitations. You might have avoided these options for reasons of practicality, interest, or relativity to the study at hand. For example, you might have only studied Hispanic mothers because they have the highest rate of obese babies. Delimitations are often strongly related to your theory and research questions. If you were researching whether there are different parenting styles between unmarried Asian, Caucasian, African American, and Hispanic women, then a delimitation of your study would be the inclusion of only participants with those demographics and the exclusion of participants from other demographics such as men, married women, and all other ethnicities of single women (inclusion and exclusion criteria). A further delimitation might be that you only included closed-ended Likert scale responses in the survey, rather than including additional open-ended responses, which might make some people more willing to take and complete your survey. Remember that delimitations are not good or bad. They are simply a detailed description of the scope of interest for your study as it relates to the research design. Don’t forget to describe the philosophical framework you used throughout your study, which also delimits your study.

Limitations

Limitations of a dissertation are potential weaknesses in your study that are mostly out of your control, given limited funding, choice of research design, statistical model constraints, or other factors. In addition, a limitation is a restriction on your study that cannot be reasonably dismissed and can affect your design and results. Do not worry about limitations because limitations affect virtually all research projects, as well as most things in life. Even when you are going to your favorite restaurant, you are limited by the menu choices. If you went to a restaurant that had a menu that you were craving, you might not receive the service, price, or location that makes you enjoy your favorite restaurant. If you studied participants’ responses to a survey, you might be limited in your abilities to gain the exact type or geographic scope of participants you wanted. The people whom you managed to get to take your survey may not truly be a random sample, which is also a limitation. If you used a common test for data findings, your results are limited by the reliability of the test. If your study was limited to a certain amount of time, your results are affected by the operations of society during that time period (e.g., economy, social trends). It is important for you to remember that limitations of a dissertation are often not something that can be solved by the researcher. Also, remember that whatever limits you also limits other researchers, whether they are the largest medical research companies or consumer habits corporations. Certain kinds of limitations are often associated with the analytical approach you take in your research, too. For example, some qualitative methods like heuristics or phenomenology do not lend themselves well to replicability. Also, most of the commonly used quantitative statistical models can only determine correlation, but not causation.

Assumptions

Assumptions are things that are accepted as true, or at least plausible, by researchers and peers who will read your dissertation or thesis. In other words, any scholar reading your paper will assume that certain aspects of your study is true given your population, statistical test, research design, or other delimitations. For example, if you tell your friend that your favorite restaurant is an Italian place, your friend will assume that you don’t go there for the sushi. It’s assumed that you go there to eat Italian food. Because most assumptions are not discussed in-text, assumptions that are discussed in-text are discussed in the context of the limitations of your study, which is typically in the discussion section. This is important, because both assumptions and limitations affect the inferences you can draw from your study. One of the more common assumptions made in survey research is the assumption of honesty and truthful responses. However, for certain sensitive questions this assumption may be more difficult to accept, in which case it would be described as a limitation of the study. For example, asking people to report their criminal behavior in a survey may not be as reliable as asking people to report their eating habits. It is important to remember that your limitations and assumptions should not contradict one another. For instance, if you state that generalizability is a limitation of your study given that your sample was limited to one city in the United States, then you should not claim generalizability to the United States population as an assumption of your study. Statistical models in quantitative research designs are accompanied with assumptions as well, some more strict than others. These assumptions generally refer to the characteristics of the data, such as distributions, correlational trends, and variable type, just to name a few. Violating these assumptions can lead to drastically invalid results, though this often depends on sample size and other considerations.

Click here to cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Research Limitations & Delimitations

What they are and how they’re different (with examples)

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewed By: David Phair (PhD) | September 2022

If you’re new to the world of research, you’ve probably heard the terms “ research limitations ” and “ research delimitations ” being thrown around, often quite loosely. In this post, we’ll unpack what both of these mean, how they’re similar and how they’re different – so that you can write up these sections the right way.

Overview: Limitations vs Delimitations

Are they the same?
What are research limitations
What are research delimitations
Limitations vs delimitations

First things first…

Let’s start with the most important takeaway point of this post – research limitations and research delimitations are not the same – but they are related to each other (we’ll unpack that a little later). So, if you hear someone using these two words interchangeably, be sure to share this post with them!

Research Limitations

Research limitations are, at the simplest level, the weaknesses of the study, based on factors that are often outside of your control as the researcher. These factors could include things like time , access to funding, equipment , data or participants . For example, if you weren’t able to access a random sample of participants for your study and had to adopt a convenience sampling strategy instead, that would impact the generalizability of your findings and therefore reflect a limitation of your study.

Research limitations can also emerge from the research design itself . For example, if you were undertaking a correlational study, you wouldn’t be able to infer causality (since correlation doesn’t mean certain causation). Similarly, if you utilised online surveys to collect data from your participants, you naturally wouldn’t be able to get the same degree of rich data that you would from in-person interviews .

Simply put, research limitations reflect the shortcomings of a study , based on practical (or theoretical) constraints that the researcher faced. These shortcomings limit what you can conclude from a study, but at the same time, present a foundation for future research . Importantly, all research has limitations , so there’s no need to hide anything here – as long as you discuss how the limitations might affect your findings, it’s all good.

Research Delimitations

Alright, now that we’ve unpacked the limitations, let’s move on to the delimitations .

Research delimitations are similar to limitations in that they also “ limit ” the study, but their focus is entirely different. Specifically, the delimitations of a study refer to the scope of the research aims and research questions . In other words, delimitations reflect the choices you, as the researcher, intentionally make in terms of what you will and won’t try to achieve with your study. In other words, what your research aims and research questions will and won’t include.

As we’ve spoken about many times before, it’s important to have a tight, narrow focus for your research, so that you can dive deeply into your topic, apply your energy to one specific area and develop meaningful insights. If you have an overly broad scope or unfocused topic, your research will often pull in multiple, even opposing directions, and you’ll just land up with a muddy mess of findings .

So, the delimitations section is where you’ll clearly state what your research aims and research questions will focus on – and just as importantly, what they will exclude . For example, you might investigate a widespread phenomenon, but choose to focus your study on a specific age group, ethnicity or gender. Similarly, your study may focus exclusively on one country, city or even organization. As long as the scope is well justified (in other words, it represents a novel, valuable research topic), this is perfectly acceptable – in fact, it’s essential. Remember, focus is your friend.

Need a helping hand?

Conclusion: Limitations vs Delimitations

Ok, so let’s recap.

Research limitations and research delimitations are related in that they both refer to “limits” within a study. But, they are distinctly different. Limitations reflect the shortcomings of your study, based on practical or theoretical constraints that you faced.

Contrasted to that, delimitations reflect the choices that you made in terms of the focus and scope of your research aims and research questions. If you want to learn more about research aims and questions, you can check out this video post , where we unpack those concepts in detail.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

Research philosophy basics: What is research philosophy?

18 Comments

Good clarification of ideas on how a researcher ought to do during Process of choice

Thank you so much for this very simple but explicit explanation on limitation and delimitation. It has so helped me to develop my masters proposal. hope to recieve more from your site as time progresses

Thank you for this explanation – very clear.

Thanks for the explanation, really got it well.

This website is really helpful for my masters proposal

Thank you very much for helping to explain these two terms

I spent almost the whole day trying to figure out the differences

when I came across your notes everything became very clear

thanks for the clearly outlined explanation on the two terms, limitation and delimitation.

Very helpful Many thanks 🙏

Excellent it resolved my conflict .

I would like you to assist me please. If in my Research, I interviewed some participants and I submitted Questionnaires to other participants to answered to the questions, in the same organization, Is this a Qualitative methodology , a Quantitative Methodology or is it a Mixture Methodology I have used in my research? Please help me

How do I cite this article in APA format

Really so great ,finally have understood it’s difference now

Getting more clear regarding Limitations and Delimitation and concepts

I really appreciate your apt and precise explanation of the two concepts namely ; Limitations and Delimitations.

This is a good sources of research information for learners.

thank you for this, very helpful to researchers

Very good explained

Great and clear explanation, after a long confusion period on the two words, i can now explain to someone with ease.

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.

Print Friendly

Link to facebook
Link to linkedin
Link to twitter
Link to youtube
Writing Tips

How to Identify Limitations in Research

4-minute read

7th March 2022

Whether you’re a veteran researcher with years of experience under your belt or a novice to the field that’s feeling overwhelmed with where to start, you must understand that every study has its limitations. These are restrictions that arise from the study’s design, or the methodology implemented during the testing phase. Unfortunately, research limitations will always exist due to the subjective nature of testing a hypothesis. We’ve compiled some helpful information below on how to identify and accept research limitations and use them to your advantage. Essentially, we’ll show you how to make lemonade (a brilliant piece of academic work ) from the lemons you receive (the constraints your study reveals).

Research Limitations

So, let’s dive straight in, shall we? It’s always beneficial (and good practice) to disclose your research limitations . A common thought is that divulging these shortcomings will undermine the credibility and quality of your research. However, this is certainly not the case— stating the facts upfront not only reinforces your reputation as a researcher but also lets the assessor or reader know that you’re confident and transparent about the results and relevance of your study, despite these constraints.

Additionally, it creates a gap for more research opportunities, where you can analyze these limitations and determine how to incorporate or address them in a new batch of tests or create a new hypothesis altogether. Another bonus is that it helps readers to understand the optimum conditions for how to apply the results of your testing. This is a win-win, making for a far more persuasive research paper .

Now that you know why you should clarify your research limitations, let’s focus on which ones take precedence and should be disclosed. Any given research project can be vulnerable to various hindrances, so how do you identify them and single out the most significant ones to discuss? Well, that depends entirely on the nature of your study. You’ll need to comb through your research approach, methodology, testing processes, and expected results to identify the type of limitations your study may be exposed to. It’s worth noting that this understanding can only offer a broad idea of the possible restrictions you’ll face and may potentially change throughout the study.

We’ve compiled a list of the most common types of research limitations that you may encounter so you can adequately prepare for them and remain vigilant during each stage of your study.

Sample Size:

It’s critical that you choose a sample size that accurately represents the population you wish to test your theory on. If a sample is too small, the results cannot reliably be generalized across a large population.

Methodology:

The method you choose before you commence testing might seem effective in theory, but too many stumbling blocks during the testing phase can influence the accuracy and reliability of the results.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

Collection of Data:

The methods you utilize to obtain your research—surveys, emails, in-person interviews, phone calls—will directly influence the type of results your study yields.

Age of Data:

The nature of the information—and how far back it goes—affects the type of assumptions you can make. Extrapolating older data for a current hypothesis can significantly change the outcome of your testing.

Time Constraints:

Working within the deadline of when you need to submit your findings will determine the extent of your research and testing and, therefore, can heavily impact your results. Limited time frames for testing might mean not achieving the scope of results you were originally looking for.

Limited Budget:

Your study may require equipment and other resources that can become extremely costly. Budget constraints may mean you cannot acquire advanced software, programs, or travel to multiple destinations to interview participants. All of these factors can substantially influence your results.

So, now that you know how to determine your research limitations and the types you might experience, where should you document it? It’s commonly disclosed at the beginning of your discussion section , so the reader understands the shortcomings of your study before digging into the juicy bit—your findings. Alternatively, you can detail the constraints faced at the end of the discussion section to emphasize the requirements for the completion of further studies.

We hope this post will prepare you for some of the pitfalls you may encounter when conducting and documenting your research. Once you have a first draft ready, consider submitting a free sample to us for proofreading to ensure that your writing is concise and error-free and your results—despite their limitations— shine through.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

2-minute read

How to Cite the CDC in APA

If you’re writing about health issues, you might need to reference the Centers for Disease...

5-minute read

Six Product Description Generator Tools for Your Product Copy

Introduction If you’re involved with ecommerce, you’re likely familiar with the often painstaking process of...

3-minute read

What Is a Content Editor?

Are you interested in learning more about the role of a content editor and the...

The Benefits of Using an Online Proofreading Service

Proofreading is important to ensure your writing is clear and concise for your readers. Whether...

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

Creating presentations can be time-consuming and frustrating. Trying to construct a visually appealing and informative...

What Is Market Research?

No matter your industry, conducting market research helps you keep up to date with shifting...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Organizing Academic Research Papers: Limitations of the Study

Purpose of Guide
Design Flaws to Avoid
Glossary of Research Terms
Narrowing a Topic Idea
Broadening a Topic Idea
Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
Academic Writing Style
Choosing a Title
Making an Outline
Paragraph Development
Executive Summary
Background Information
The Research Problem/Question
Theoretical Framework
Citation Tracking
Content Alert Services
Evaluating Sources
Primary Sources
Secondary Sources
Tertiary Sources
What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
Qualitative Methods
Quantitative Methods
Using Non-Textual Elements
Limitations of the Study
Common Grammar Mistakes
Avoiding Plagiarism
Footnotes or Endnotes?
Further Readings
Annotated Bibliography
Dealing with Nervousness
Using Visual Aids
Grading Someone Else's Paper
How to Manage Group Projects
Multiple Book Review Essay
Reviewing Collected Essays
About Informed Consent
Writing Field Notes
Writing a Policy Memo
Writing a Research Proposal
Acknowledgements

The limitations of the study are those characteristics of design or methodology that impacted or influenced the application or interpretation of the results of your study. They are the constraints on generalizability and utility of findings that are the result of the ways in which you chose to design the study and/or the method used to establish internal and external validity.

Importance of...

Always acknowledge a study's limitations. It is far better for you to identify and acknowledge your study’s limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor and be graded down because you appear to have ignored them.

Keep in mind that acknowledgement of a study's limitations is an opportunity to make suggestions for further research. If you do connect your study's limitations to suggestions for further research, be sure to explain the ways in which these unanswered questions may become more focused because of your study.

Acknowledgement of a study's limitations also provides you with an opportunity to demonstrate to your professor that you have thought critically about the research problem, understood the relevant literature published about it, and correctly assessed the methods chosen for studying the problem. A key objective of the research process is not only discovering new knowledge but also to confront assumptions and explore what we don't know.

Claiming limitiations is a subjective process because you must evaluate the impact of those limitations . Don't just list key weaknesses and the magnitude of a study's limitations. To do so diminishes the validity of your research because it leaves the reader wondering whether, or in what ways, limitation(s) in your study may have impacted the findings and conclusions. Limitations require a critical, overall appraisal and interpretation of their impact. You should answer the question: do these problems with errors, methods, validity, etc. eventually matter and, if so, to what extent?

Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation . Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com.

Descriptions of Possible Limitations

Here are examples of limitations you may need to describe and to discuss how they possibly impacted your findings. Descriptions of limitations should be stated in the past tense.

Possible Methodological Limitations

Sample size -- the number of the units of analysis you use in your study is dictated by the type of research problem you are investigating. Note that, if your sample size is too small, it will be difficult to find significant relationships from the data, as statistical tests normally require a larger sample size to ensure a representative distribution of the population and to be considered representative of groups of people to whom results will be generalized or transferred.
Lack of available and/or reliable data -- a lack of data or of reliable data will likely require you to limit the scope of your analysis, the size of your sample, or it can be a significant obstacle in finding a trend and a meaningful relationship. You need to not only describe these limitations but to offer reasons why you believe data is missing or is unreliable. However, don’t just throw up your hands in frustration; use this as an opportunity to describe the need for future research.
Lack of prior research studies on the topic -- citing prior research studies forms the basis of your literature review and helps lay a foundation for understanding the research problem you are investigating. Depending on the currency or scope of your research topic, there may be little, if any, prior research on your topic. Before assuming this to be true, consult with a librarian! In cases when a librarian has confirmed that there is a lack of prior research, you may be required to develop an entirely new research typology [for example, using an exploratory rather than an explanatory research design]. Note that this limitation can serve as an important opportunity to describe the need for further research.
Measure used to collect the data -- sometimes it is the case that, after completing your interpretation of the findings, you discover that the way in which you gathered data inhibited your ability to conduct a thorough analysis of the results. For example, you regret not including a specific question in a survey that, in retrospect, could have helped address a particular issue that emerged later in the study. Acknowledge the deficiency by stating a need in future research to revise the specific method for gathering data.
Self-reported data -- whether you are relying on pre-existing self-reported data or you are conducting a qualitative research study and gathering the data yourself, self-reported data is limited by the fact that it rarely can be independently verified. In other words, you have to take what people say, whether in interviews, focus groups, or on questionnaires, at face value. However, self-reported data contain several potential sources of bias that should be noted as limitations: (1) selective memory (remembering or not remembering experiences or events that occurred at some point in the past); (2) telescoping [recalling events that occurred at one time as if they occurred at another time]; (3) attribution [the act of attributing positive events and outcomes to one's own agency but attributing negative events and outcomes to external forces]; and, (4) exaggeration [the act of representing outcomes or embellishing events as more significant than is actually suggested from other data].

Possible Limitations of the Researcher

Access -- if your study depends on having access to people, organizations, or documents and, for whatever reason, access is denied or otherwise limited, the reasons for this need to be described.
Longitudinal effects -- unlike your professor, who can literally devote years [even a lifetime] to studying a single research problem, the time available to investigate a research problem and to measure change or stability within a sample is constrained by the due date of your assignment. Be sure to choose a topic that does not require an excessive amount of time to complete the literature review, apply the methodology, and gather and interpret the results. If you're unsure, talk to your professor.
Cultural and other type of bias -- we all have biases, whether we are conscience of them or not. Bias is when a person, place, or thing is viewed or shown in a consistently inaccurate way. It is usually negative, though one can have a positive bias as well. When proof-reading your paper, be especially critical in reviewing how you have stated a problem, selected the data to be studied, what may have been omitted, the manner in which you have ordered events, people, or places and how you have chosen to represent a person, place, or thing, to name a phenomenon, or to use possible words with a positive or negative connotation. Note that if you detect bias in prior research, it must be acknowledged and you should explain what measures were taken to avoid perpetuating bias.
Fluency in a language -- if your research focuses on measuring the perceived value of after-school tutoring among Mexican-American ESL [English as a Second Language] students, for example, and you are not fluent in Spanish, you are limited in being able to read and interpret Spanish language research studies on the topic. This deficiency should be acknowledged.

Structure and Writing Style

If you determine that your study is seriously flawed due to important limitations , such as, an inability to acquire critical data, consider reframing it as a pilot study intended to lay the groundwork for a more complete research study in the future. Be sure, though, to specifically explain the ways that these flaws can be successfully overcome in later studies.

When discussing the limitations of your research, be sure to:

Describe each limitation in detailed but concise terms;
Explain why each limitation exists;
Provide the reasons why each limitation could not be overcome using the method(s) chosen to gather the data [cite to other studies that had similar problems when possible];
Assess the impact of each limitation in relation to the overall findings and conclusions of your study; and,
If appropriate, describe how these limitations could point to the need for further research.

Remember that the method you chose may be the source of a significant limitation that has emerged during your interpretation of the results [for example, you didn't ask a particular question in a survey that you later wish you had]. If this is the case, don't panic. Acknowledge it, and explain how applying a different or more robust methodology might address the research problem more effectively in any future study. A underlying goal of scholarly research is not only to prove what works, but to demonstrate what doesn't work or what needs further clarification.

Brutus, Stéphane et al. Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports: Analysis and Recommendations. Journal of Management 39 (January 2013): 48-75; Ioannidis, John P.A. Limitations are not Properly Acknowledged in the Scientific Literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 60 (2007): 324-329; Pasek, Josh. Writing the Empirical Social Science Research Paper: A Guide for the Perplexed . January 24, 2012. Academia.edu; Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation . Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com; What Is an Academic Paper? Institute for Writing Rhetoric. Dartmouth College; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University.

Writing Tip

Don't Inflate the Importance of Your Findings! After all the hard work and long hours devoted to writing your research paper, it is easy to get carried away with attributing unwarranted importance to what you’ve done. We all want our academic work to be viewed as excellent and worthy of a good grade, but it is important that you understand and openly acknowledge the limitiations of your study. Inflating of the importance of your study's findings in an attempt hide its flaws is a big turn off to your readers. A measure of humility goes a long way!

Another Writing Tip

Negative Results are Not a Limitation!

Negative evidence refers to findings that unexpectedly challenge rather than support your hypothesis. If you didn't get the results you anticipated, it may mean your hypothesis was incorrect and needs to be reformulated, or, perhaps you have stumbled onto something unexpected that warrants further study. Moreover, the absence of an effect may be very telling in many situations, particularly in experimental research designs. In any case, your results may be of importance to others even though they did not support your hypothesis. Do not fall into the trap of thinking that results contrary to what you expected is a limitation to your study. If you carried out the research well, they are simply your results and only require additional interpretation.

Yet Another Writing Tip

A Note about Sample Size Limitations in Qualitative Research

Sample sizes are typically smaller in qualitative research because, as the study goes on, acquiring more data does not necessarily lead to more information. This is because one occurrence of a piece of data, or a code, is all that is necessary to ensure that it becomes part of the analysis framework. However, it remains true that sample sizes that are too small cannot adequately support claims of having achieved valid conclusions and sample sizes that are too large do not permit the deep, naturalistic, and inductive analysis that defines qualitative inquiry. Determining adequate sample size in qualitative research is ultimately a matter of judgment and experience in evaluating the quality of the information collected against the uses to which it will be applied and the particular research method and purposeful sampling strategy employed. If the sample size is found to be a limitation, it may reflect your judgement about the methodological technique chosen [e.g., single life history study versus focus group interviews] rather than the number of respondents used.

Huberman, A. Michael and Matthew B. Miles. Data Management and Analysis Methods. In Handbook of Qualitative Research. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994), pp. 428-444.

<< Previous: 8. The Discussion
Next: 9. The Conclusion >>
Last Updated: Jul 18, 2023 11:58 AM
URL: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
QuickSearch
Library Catalog
Databases A-Z
Publication Finder
Course Reserves
Citation Linker
Digital Commons
Our Website

Research Support

Ask a Librarian
Appointments
Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
Research Guides
Databases by Subject
Citation Help

Using the Library

Reserve a Group Study Room
Renew Books
Honors Study Rooms
Off-Campus Access
Library Policies
Library Technology

User Information

Grad Students
Online Students
COVID-19 Updates
Staff Directory
News & Announcements
Library Newsletter

My Accounts

Interlibrary Loan
Staff Site Login

FIND US ON

CPS Online Graduate Studies Research Paper (UNH Manchester Library): Limitations of the Study

Overview of the Research Process for Capstone Projects
Types of Research Design
Selecting a Research Problem
The Title of Your Research Paper
Before You Begin Writing
7 Parts of the Research Paper
Background Information
Quanitative and Qualitative Methods
Qualitative Methods
Quanitative Methods
Resources to Help You With the Literature Review
Non-Textual Elements

Limitations of the Study

Format of Capstone Research Projects at GSC
Editing and Proofreading Your Paper
Acknowledgements
UNH Scholar's Repository

The limitations of the study are those characteristics of design or methodology that impacted or influenced the interpretation of the findings from your research. They are the constraints on generalizability, applications to practice, and/or utility of findings that are the result of the ways in which you initially chose to design the study and/or the method used to establish internal and external validity.

Price, James H. and Judy Murnan. “Research Limitations and the Necessity of Reporting Them.” American Journal of Health Education 35 (2004): 66-67.

Always acknowledge a study's limitations. It is far better that you identify and acknowledge your study’s limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor and be graded down because you appear to have ignored them.

Acknowledgement of a study's limitations also provides you with an opportunity to demonstrate that you have thought critically about the research problem, understood the relevant literature published about it, and correctly assessed the methods chosen for studying the problem. A key objective of the research process is not only discovering new knowledge but to also confront assumptions and explore what we don't know.

Price, James H. and Judy Murnan. “Research Limitations and the Necessity of Reporting Them.” American Journal of Health Education 35 (2004): 66-67; Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation . Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com.

Descriptions of Possible Limitations

Here are examples of limitations related to methodology and the research process you may need to describe and to discuss how they possibly impacted your results. Descriptions of limitations should be stated in the past tense because they were discovered after you completed your research.

Possible Methodological Limitations

Sample size -- the number of the units of analysis you use in your study is dictated by the type of research problem you are investigating. Note that, if your sample size is too small, it will be difficult to find significant relationships from the data, as statistical tests normally require a larger sample size to ensure a representative distribution of the population and to be considered representative of groups of people to whom results will be generalized or transferred. Note that sample size is less relevant in qualitative research.
Lack of available and/or reliable data -- a lack of data or of reliable data will likely require you to limit the scope of your analysis, the size of your sample, or it can be a significant obstacle in finding a trend and a meaningful relationship. You need to not only describe these limitations but to offer reasons why you believe data is missing or is unreliable. However, don’t just throw up your hands in frustration; use this as an opportunity to describe the need for future research.
Lack of prior research studies on the topic -- citing prior research studies forms the basis of your literature review and helps lay a foundation for understanding the research problem you are investigating. Depending on the currency or scope of your research topic, there may be little, if any, prior research on your topic. Before assuming this to be true, though, consult with a librarian. In cases when a librarian has confirmed that there is no prior research, you may be required to develop an entirely new research typology [for example, using an exploratory rather than an explanatory research design]. Note again that discovering a limitation can serve as an important opportunity to identify new gaps in the literature and to describe the need for further research.
Measure used to collect the data -- sometimes it is the case that, after completing your interpretation of the findings, you discover that the way in which you gathered data inhibited your ability to conduct a thorough analysis of the results. For example, you regret not including a specific question in a survey that, in retrospect, could have helped address a particular issue that emerged later in the study. Acknowledge the deficiency by stating a need for future researchers to revise the specific method for gathering data.
Self-reported data -- whether you are relying on pre-existing data or you are conducting a qualitative research study and gathering the data yourself, self-reported data is limited by the fact that it rarely can be independently verified. In other words, you have to take what people say, whether in interviews, focus groups, or on questionnaires, at face value. However, self-reported data can contain several potential sources of bias that you should be alert to and note as limitations. These biases become apparent if they are incongruent with data from other sources. These are: (1) selective memory [remembering or not remembering experiences or events that occurred at some point in the past]; (2) telescoping [recalling events that occurred at one time as if they occurred at another time]; (3) attribution [the act of attributing positive events and outcomes to one's own agency but attributing negative events and outcomes to external forces]; and, (4) exaggeration [the act of representing outcomes or embellishing events as more significant than is actually suggested from other data].

Possible Limitations of the Researcher

Access -- if your study depends on having access to people, organizations, or documents and, for whatever reason, access is denied or limited in some way, the reasons for this need to be described.
Longitudinal effects -- unlike your professor, who can literally devote years [even a lifetime] to studying a single topic, the time available to investigate a research problem and to measure change or stability over time is pretty much constrained by the due date of your assignment. Be sure to choose a research problem that does not require an excessive amount of time to complete the literature review, apply the methodology, and gather and interpret the results. If you're unsure whether you can complete your research within the confines of the assignment's due date, talk to your professor.
Cultural and other type of bias -- we all have biases, whether we are conscience of them or not. Bias is when a person, place, or thing is viewed or shown in a consistently inaccurate way. Bias is usually negative, though one can have a positive bias as well, especially if that bias reflects your reliance on research that only support for your hypothesis. When proof-reading your paper, be especially critical in reviewing how you have stated a problem, selected the data to be studied, what may have been omitted, the manner in which you have ordered events, people, or places, how you have chosen to represent a person, place, or thing, to name a phenomenon, or to use possible words with a positive or negative connotation.

NOTE: If you detect bias in prior research, it must be acknowledged and you should explain what measures were taken to avoid perpetuating that bias.

Fluency in a language -- if your research focuses on measuring the perceived value of after-school tutoring among Mexican-American ESL [English as a Second Language] students, for example, and you are not fluent in Spanish, you are limited in being able to read and interpret Spanish language research studies on the topic. This deficiency should be acknowledged.

Structure and Writing Style

Information about the limitations of your study are generally placed either at the beginning of the discussion section of your paper so the reader knows and understands the limitations before reading the rest of your analysis of the findings, or, the limitations are outlined at the conclusion of the discussion section as an acknowledgement of the need for further study. Statements about a study's limitations should not be buried in the body [middle] of the discussion section unless a limitation is specific to something covered in that part of the paper. If this is the case, though, the limitation should be reiterated at the conclusion of the section. If you determine that your study is seriously flawed due to important limitations, such as, an inability to acquire critical data, consider reframing it as an exploratory study intended to lay the groundwork for a more complete research study in the future. Be sure, though, to specifically explain the ways that these flaws can be successfully overcome in a new study. But, do not use this as an excuse for not developing a thorough research paper! Review the tab in this guide for developing a research topic. If serious limitations exist, it generally indicates a likelihood that your research problem is too narrowly defined or that the issue or event under study is too recent and, thus, very little research has been written about it. If serious limitations do emerge, consult with your professor about possible ways to overcome them or how to revise your study. When discussing the limitations of your research, be sure to: Describe each limitation in detailed but concise terms; Explain why each limitation exists; Provide the reasons why each limitation could not be overcome using the method(s) chosen to acquire or gather the data [cite to other studies that had similar problems when possible]; Assess the impact of each limitation in relation to the overall findings and conclusions of your study; and, If appropriate, describe how these limitations could point to the need for further research. Remember that the method you chose may be the source of a significant limitation that has emerged during your interpretation of the results [for example, you didn't interview a group of people that you later wish you had]. If this is the case, don't panic. Acknowledge it, and explain how applying a different or more robust methodology might address the research problem more effectively in a future study. A underlying goal of scholarly research is not only to show what works, but to demonstrate what doesn't work or what needs further clarification. Aguinis, Hermam and Jeffrey R. Edwards. “Methodological Wishes for the Next Decade and How to Make Wishes Come True.” Journal of Management Studies 51 (January 2014): 143-174; Brutus, Stéphane et al. "Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports: Analysis and Recommendations." Journal of Management 39 (January 2013): 48-75; Ioannidis, John P.A. "Limitations are not Properly Acknowledged in the Scientific Literature." Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 60 (2007): 324-329; Pasek, Josh. Writing the Empirical Social Science Research Paper: A Guide for the Perplexed. January 24, 2012. Academia.edu; Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation. Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com; What Is an Academic Paper? Institute for Writing Rhetoric. Dartmouth College; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University.

When discussing the limitations of your research, be sure to:

Describe each limitation in detailed but concise terms;
Explain why each limitation exists;
Provide the reasons why each limitation could not be overcome using the method(s) chosen to acquire or gather the data [cite to other studies that had similar problems when possible];
Assess the impact of each limitation in relation to the overall findings and conclusions of your study; and,
If appropriate, describe how these limitations could point to the need for further research.

Aguinis, Hermam and Jeffrey R. Edwards. “Methodological Wishes for the Next Decade and How to Make Wishes Come True.” Journal of Management Studies 51 (January 2014): 143-174; Brutus, Stéphane et al. "Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports: Analysis and Recommendations." Journal of Management 39 (January 2013): 48-75; Ioannidis, John P.A. "Limitations are not Properly Acknowledged in the Scientific Literature." Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 60 (2007): 324-329; Pasek, Josh. Writing the Empirical Social Science Research Paper: A Guide for the Perplexed . January 24, 2012. Academia.edu; Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation . Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com; What Is an Academic Paper? Institute for Writing Rhetoric. Dartmouth College; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion . The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University.

<< Previous: The Discussion
Next: Conclusion >>
Last Updated: Nov 6, 2023 1:43 PM
URL: https://libraryguides.unh.edu/cpsonlinegradpaper

Limited by our limitations

Affiliations.

1 Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. [email protected].
2 Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
PMID: 31347033
PMCID: PMC6684501
DOI: 10.1007/s40037-019-00530-x

Study limitations represent weaknesses within a research design that may influence outcomes and conclusions of the research. Researchers have an obligation to the academic community to present complete and honest limitations of a presented study. Too often, authors use generic descriptions to describe study limitations. Including redundant or irrelevant limitations is an ineffective use of the already limited word count. A meaningful presentation of study limitations should describe the potential limitation, explain the implication of the limitation, provide possible alternative approaches, and describe steps taken to mitigate the limitation. This includes placing research findings within their proper context to ensure readers do not overemphasize or minimize findings. A more complete presentation will enrich the readers' understanding of the study's limitations and support future investigation.

Keywords: Limitations; Research.

Biomedical Research / standards*
Education, Medical*
Reproducibility of Results

Research Limitations

It is for sure that your research will have some limitations and it is normal. However, it is critically important for you to be striving to minimize the range of scope of limitations throughout the research process. Also, you need to provide the acknowledgement of your research limitations in conclusions chapter honestly.

It is always better to identify and acknowledge shortcomings of your work, rather than to leave them pointed out to your by your dissertation assessor. While discussing your research limitations, don’t just provide the list and description of shortcomings of your work. It is also important for you to explain how these limitations have impacted your research findings.

Your research may have multiple limitations, but you need to discuss only those limitations that directly relate to your research problems. For example, if conducting a meta-analysis of the secondary data has not been stated as your research objective, no need to mention it as your research limitation.

Research limitations in a typical dissertation may relate to the following points:

1. Formulation of research aims and objectives . You might have formulated research aims and objectives too broadly. You can specify in which ways the formulation of research aims and objectives could be narrowed so that the level of focus of the study could be increased.

2. Implementation of data collection method . Because you do not have an extensive experience in primary data collection (otherwise you would not be reading this book), there is a great chance that the nature of implementation of data collection method is flawed.

3. Sample size. Sample size depends on the nature of the research problem. If sample size is too small, statistical tests would not be able to identify significant relationships within data set. You can state that basing your study in larger sample size could have generated more accurate results. The importance of sample size is greater in quantitative studies compared to qualitative studies.

4. Lack of previous studies in the research area . Literature review is an important part of any research, because it helps to identify the scope of works that have been done so far in research area. Literature review findings are used as the foundation for the researcher to be built upon to achieve her research objectives.

However, there may be little, if any, prior research on your topic if you have focused on the most contemporary and evolving research problem or too narrow research problem. For example, if you have chosen to explore the role of Bitcoins as the future currency, you may not be able to find tons of scholarly paper addressing the research problem, because Bitcoins are only a recent phenomenon.

5. Scope of discussions . You can include this point as a limitation of your research regardless of the choice of the research area. Because (most likely) you don’t have many years of experience of conducing researches and producing academic papers of such a large size individually, the scope and depth of discussions in your paper is compromised in many levels compared to the works of experienced scholars.

You can discuss certain points from your research limitations as the suggestion for further research at conclusions chapter of your dissertation.

My e-book, The Ultimate Guide to Writing a Dissertation in Business Studies: a step by step assistance offers practical assistance to complete a dissertation with minimum or no stress. The e-book covers all stages of writing a dissertation starting from the selection to the research area to submitting the completed version of the work within the deadline. John Dudovskiy

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
My Account Login
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Open access
Published: 20 April 2024

Viral decisions: unmasking the impact of COVID-19 info and behavioral quirks on investment choices

Wasim ul Rehman ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9927-2780 1 ,
Omur Saltik 2 ,
Faryal Jalil 3 &
Suleyman Degirmen 4

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume 11 , Article number: 524 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

This study aims to investigate the impact of behavioral biases on investment decisions and the moderating role of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing. Furthermore, it highlights the significance of considering cognitive biases and sociodemographic factors in analyzing investor behavior and in designing agent-based models for market simulation. The findings reveal that these behavioral factors significantly positively affect investment decisions, aligning with prior research. The agent-based model’s outcomes indicate that younger, less experienced agents are more prone to herding behavior and perform worse in the simulation compared to their older, higher-income counterparts. In conclusion, the results offer valuable insights into the influence of behavioral biases and the moderating role of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing on investment decisions. Investors can leverage these insights to devise effective strategies that foster rational decision-making during crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction

Coronavirus (COVID-19) is recognized as a significant health crisis that has adversely affected the well-being of global economies (Baker et al. 2020 ; Smales 2021 ; Debata et al. 2021 ). First identified in December 2019 as a highly fatal and contagious disease, it was declared a public health emergency by the World Health Organization (WHO) (WHO 2020 ; Baker et al. 2020 ; Altig et al. 2020 ; Smales 2021 ; Li et al. 2020 ). The outbreak swiftly spread across 31 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions in China, eventually evolving into a severe global pandemic that significantly impacted the global economy, particularly equity markets and social development (WHO 2020 ; Kazmi et al. 2020 ; Li et al. 2020 ). Since the early 2020 emergence of COVID-19 symptoms, the pandemic has caused considerable market decline and volatility in stock returns, significantly impacting the prosperity of world economies (Rahman et al. 2022 ; Soltani et al. 2021 ; Rubesam and Júnior 2022 ; Debata et al. 2021 ; Baker et al. 2020 ; Altig et al. 2020 ). This situation has garnered the attention of many policymakers and economists since its classification as a public health emergency.

Pakistan’s National Command and Operation Centre reported its first two confirmed COVID-19 cases on February 26, 2020. Following this, the Pakistan Stock Exchange experienced a significant downturn, losing 2266 points and erasing Rs. 436 billion in market equity. Foreign investment saw a notable decline, with stocks worth $22.5 million contracting sharply. By the end of February 2020, stock investments totaling $56.40 million had been liquidated. This dramatic drop in equity markets is attributed to the global outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic (Khan et al. 2020 ). Additionally, for the first time in 75 years, Pakistan’s economy underwent its most substantial contraction in economic growth, recording a GDP growth rate of −0.4% in the first nine months. All three sectors of the economy—agriculture, services, and industry—fell short of their growth targets, culminating in a loss of one-third of their revenue. Exports declined by more than 50% due to the pandemic. Economists have raised concerns about a potential recession as the country grapples with virus containment efforts (Shafi et al. 2020 ; Naqvi 2020 ). Consequently, the rapid spread of COVID-19 has heightened volatility in financial markets, inflicted substantial losses on investors, and caused widespread turmoil in financial and liquidity markets globally (Zhang et al. 2020 ; Goodell 2020 ; Al-Awadhi et al. 2020 ; Ritika et al. 2023 ). This uncertainty has been exacerbated by an increasing number of positive COVID-19 cases.

Since the magnitude of the COVID-19 outbreak became evident, capital markets worldwide have been experiencing significant declines and volatility in stock returns, affected by all new virus variants despite their effective treatments (Hong et al. 2021 ; Rubesam and Júnior 2022 ; Zhang et al. 2020 ). Previous studies have characterized COVID-19 as a particularly devastating and deadly pandemic, severely impacting socio-economic infrastructures globally (Fernandes 2020 ). The pandemic has disrupted trade and investment activities, leading to imbalances in equity market returns (Xu 2021 ; Shehzad et al. 2020 ; Zaremba et al. 2020 ; Baig et al. 2021 ). In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, various governments, including Pakistan’s, have implemented unprecedented and diverse measures. These include restricting the mobility of the general public and commercial operations, and implementing smart or partial lockdowns, all aimed at mitigating the pandemic’s impact on global economic growth (Rubesam and Júnior 2022 ; Zaremba et al. 2020 ).

Investment decisions become notably complex and challenging when influenced by behavioral biases (Pompian 2012 ). In this context, numerous studies have sought to reconcile various behavioral finance theories with the notion of investors as rational decision-makers. One prominent theory is the Efficient Market Hypothesis, which asserts that capital markets are efficient when decisions are informed by symmetrical information among participants (Fama 1991 ). Yet, in reality, individual investors often struggle to make rational investment choices (Kim and Nofsinger 2008 ), as their decisions are significantly swayed by behavioral biases, leading to market inefficiencies. These biases, including investor sentiment, overconfidence, over/underreaction, and herding behavior, are recognized as widespread in human decision-making (Metawa et al. 2018 ). Prior research has identified various behavioral and psychological biases—such as loss aversion, anchoring, heuristic biases, and the disposition effect—that cause investors to stray from rational investment decisions. Moreover, investors’ responses to COVID-19-related news, like infection rates, vaccine developments, lockdowns, or economic forecasts, often reflect behavioral biases such as investor sentiment, overconfidence, over/underreaction, or herding behavior towards short-term events, thereby affecting market volatility (Soltani and Boujelbene 2023 ; Dash and Maitra 2022 ). These biases may have a wide applicability across different markets, regardless of specific cultural or regulatory differences. Consequently, we posit that these four behavioral biases, in the context of COVID-19, are key factors in reducing vulnerability in investment decisions (Dermawan and Trisnawati 2023 ), especially for individual investors who are more susceptible than in a typical investment environment (Botzen et al. 2021 ; Talwar et al. 2021 ). Therefore, understanding these behavioral biases—such as investor sentiment, overconfidence, over/underreaction, or herding behavior—during the COVID-19 pandemic is crucial, as no previous epidemic has demonstrated such profound impacts of behavioral biases on investment decisions (Baker et al. 2020 ; Sattar et al. 2020 ).

Numerous studies have explored the impact of behavioral biases, including investor sentiment, overconfidence, over/under-reaction, and herding behavior, on investment decisions (Metawa et al. 2018 ; Menike et al. 2015 ; Nofsinger and Varma 2014 ; Qadri and Shabbir 2014 ; Asaad 2012 ; Kengatharan and Kengatharan 2014 ). Recent literature has also shed light on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on financial and precious commodity markets (Gao et al. 2023 ; Zhang et al. 2020 ; Corbet et al. 2020 ; Baker et al. 2020 ; Mumtaz and Ahmad 2020 ; Ahmed et al. 2022 ; Hamidon and Kehelwalatenna 2020 ). However, academic research specifically addressing the moderating role of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing on behavioral biases remains limited. It has been observed that global pandemics, such as the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), significantly influence stock market dynamics, sparking widespread fear among investors and leading to market uncertainty (Del Giudice and Paltrinieri 2017 ; He et al. 2020 ). This study contributes to the field by examining how behavioral biases, such as investor sentiment, overconfidence, over/under-reaction, and herding behavior, are influenced by the unique circumstances of the COVID-19 crisis. Furthermore, this research provides novel insights into real-time investor behavior and policymaking, thus advancing the academic debate on the role of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing within behavioral finance.

The primary goal of this study is to explore the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on behavioral biases and their effect on investment decisions. Additionally, it aims to assess how various socio-demographic factors influence investment decision-making. These factors include age, occupation, gender, educational qualifications, type of investor, investment objectives, reasons for investing, preferred investment duration, and considerations prior to investing, such as the safety of the principal, risk level, expected returns, maturity period, and sources of investment advice. We hypothesize that these factors significantly influence investment decisions, and our analysis endeavors to investigate the relationship between these factors and investment behavior. By thoroughly examining these variables, the study aims to shed light on the role socio-demographic factors play in investment behavior and enhance the understanding of the investment decision-making process. Additionally, the study seeks to conduct a cluster analysis to identify hierarchical relationships and causality, alongside an agent-based learning model that illustrates the susceptibility of low-income and younger age groups to herding behavior. The article provides the codes and outcomes of the model.

The study will commence with an introduction that outlines the scope and significance of the research. Following this, a literature review will be provided, along with the development of hypotheses concerning the behavioral biases affecting investment decisions and the role of socio-demographic factors in shaping investment behavior. The methodology section will detail the research approach, data collection process, variables considered for analysis, and the statistical methods applied. Subsequently, the results section will present findings from the regression and moderating analyses, cluster analysis, and the agent-based learning model. This will include a detailed explanation of the model codes and their interpretations. The discussion section will interpret the study’s results, highlighting their relevance to policymakers, financial advisors, and individual investors. The article will conclude by summarizing the main discoveries and offering suggestions for further inquiry in this domain.

Literature review and development of hypotheses

Invsetor sentiments and investment decisions.

Pandemic-driven sentiments play a crucial role in determining market returns, making it imperative to understand pandemic-related sentiments to predict future investor returns. Consequently, we posit that the sharing of COVID-19 pandemic information is a critical factor influencing investor sentiments towards investment decisions (Li et al. 2021 ; Anusakumar et al. 2017 ; Zhu and Niu 2016 ; Jiang et al. 2021 ). Generally, investors’ sentiments refer to their beliefs, anticipations, and outlooks regarding future cash flows, which are significantly influenced by external factors (Baker and Wurgler 2006 ). Ding et al. ( 2021 ) define investor sentiment as the collective attitude of investors towards a particular market or security, reflected in trading activities and price movements of securities. A trend of rising prices signals bullish sentiments, while decreasing prices indicate bearish investor sentiment. These sentiments, including emotions and beliefs about investment risks, notably affect investors’ behavior and yield (Baker and Wurgler 2006 ; Anusakumar et al. 2017 ; Jansen and Nahuis 2003 ). Sentiment reacts to stock price news (Mian and Sankaraguruswamy 2012 ), with stock prices responding more positively to favorable earnings news during periods of high sentiment than in low sentiment periods, and vice versa. This sentiment-driven reaction to share price movements is observed across all types of stocks (Mian and Sankaraguruswamy 2012 ). Furthermore, research indicates that market responses to earnings announcements are asymmetrical, especially in the context of pessimistic investor sentiments (Jiang et al. 2019 ). Such reactions were notably pronounced during COVID-19 pandemic news, where sentiments such as fear, greed, or optimism significantly influenced market dynamics (Jiang et al. 2021 ). Thus, information related to the COVID-19 pandemic emerges as a valuable resource for forecasting future returns and market volatility, ultimately affecting investment decision-making (Debata et al. 2021 ).

Overconfidence and investment decision

Standard finance theories suggest that investors aim for rational decision-making (Statman et al. 2006 ). However, their judgments are often swayed by personal sentiments or cognitive errors, leading to overconfidence (Apergis and Apergis 2021 ). Overconfidence in investing can be described as an inflated belief in one’s financial insight and decision-making capabilities (Pikulina et al. 2017 ; Lichtenstein and Fischhoff 1977 ), or a tendency to overvalue one’s skills and knowledge (Dittrich et al. 2005 ). This results in investors perceiving themselves as more knowledgeable than they are (Moore and Healy 2008 ; Pikulina et al. 2017 ).

Overconfidence has been categorized into overestimation, where investors believe their abilities and chances of success are higher than actual, and over-placement, where individuals see themselves as superior to others (Moore and Healy 2008 ). Such overconfidence affects investment choices, leading to potentially inappropriate high-risk investments (Pikulina et al. 2017 ). Overconfident investors often attribute success to personal abilities and failures to external factors (Barber and Odean 2000 ; Tariq and Ullah 2013 ). Overconfidence also leads to suboptimal decision-making, especially under uncertainty (Dittrich et al. 2005 ).

Behavioral finance research shows that individual investors tend to overestimate their chances of success and underestimate risks (Wei et al. 2011 ; Dittrich et al. 2005 ). Excessive overconfidence prompts over-investment, whereas insufficient confidence causes under-investment; moderate confidence, however, leads to more prudent investing (Pikulina et al. 2017 ). The lack of market information often triggers this scenario (Wang 2001 ). Amidst recent market anomalies, COVID-19 information has significantly impacted investors’ overconfidence in their investment decisions. Studies have shown that overconfident investors underestimate their personal risk of COVID-19 compared to the general risk perception (Bottemanne et al. 2020 ; Heimer et al. 2020 ; Boruchowicz and Lopez Boo 2022 ; Druica et al. 2020 ; Raude et al. 2020 ). Overconfidence may lead to adverse selection and undervaluing others’ actions, underestimating the likelihood of loss due to inadequate COVID-19 information (Hossain and Siddiqua 2022 ). Consequently, this study hypothesizes that certain exogenous factors, integral to COVID-19 information sharing, may moderate investment decisions in the context of investor overconfidence.

Over/under reaction and investment decision

The Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) suggests that investors’ attempts to act rationally are based on the availability of market information (Fama 1998 ; Fama et al. 1969 ; De Bondt 2000 ). However, psychological biases in investors systematically respond to unwelcome news, leading to overreaction and underreaction, thus challenging the notion of market efficiency (Maher and Parikh 2011 ; De Bondt and Thaler 1985 ). Overreaction and underreaction biases refer to exaggerated responses to recent market news, resulting in the overbuying or overselling of securities in financial markets (Durand et al. 2021 ; Spyrou et al. 2007 ). Barberis et al. ( 1998 ) identified both underreaction and overreaction as pervasive anomalies that drive investors toward irrational investment decisions. Similarly, Hirshleifer ( 2001 ) noted that noisy trading contributes to overreaction, which in turn leads to excessive market volatility.

The impact of the COVID-19 outbreak extends far beyond the loss of millions of lives, disrupting financial markets from every angle (Zhang et al. 2020 ; Iqbal and Bilal 2021 ; Tauni et al. 2020 ; Borgards et al. 2021 ). Market reactions have been significantly shaped by COVID-19 pandemic information sharing, affecting investors’ decisions (Kannadas 2021 ). Recent studies have found that investors’ biases in evaluating the precision and predictive accuracy of COVID-19 information can lead to overreactions and underreactions (Borgards et al. 2021 ; Xu et al. 2022 ; Kannadas 2021 ). Furthermore, research documents the growing influence of COVID-19 information sharing on market reactions worldwide, including in the US, Asian, European, and Australian markets (Xu et al. 2022 ; Nguyen et al. 2020 ; Nguyen and Hoang Dinh 2021 ; Naidu and Ranjeeni 2021 ; Heyden and Heyden 2021 ), indicating that market reactions, characterized by non-linear behavior, are driven by investors’ beliefs.

Previous literature has scarcely explored the role of investors’ overreaction and underreaction in decision-making. Recently, emerging research has begun to enrich the literature by examining the moderating role of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing.

Herding behavior and investment decision

According to the assumptions of Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH), optimal decision-making is facilitated by the availability of market information and stability of stock returns (Fama 1970 ; Raza et al. 2023 ). However, these conditions are seldom met in reality, as decisions are influenced by human behavior shaped by socio-economic norms (Summers 1986 ; Shiller 1989 ). Behavioral finance research suggests that herding behavior plays a significant role in the decline of asset and stock prices, implying that identifying herding can aid investors in making more rational decisions (Bharti and Kumar 2022 ; Jiang et al. 2022 ; Jiang and Verardo 2018 ; Ali 2022 ). Bikhchandani and Sharma ( 2000 ) define herding as investors’ tendency to mimic others’ trading behaviors, often ignoring their own information. It is essentially a group dynamic where decisions are irrationally based on others’ information, overlooking personal insights, experiences, or beliefs (Bikhchandani and Sharma 2000 ; Huang and Wang 2017 ). Echoing this, Hirshleifer and Hong Teoh ( 2003 ) argue that herding is characterized by investment decisions being influenced by the actions of others.

The sharp market declines prompted by events such as the COVID-19 pandemic raise questions about its influence on investors’ herding behaviors (Rubesam and Júnior 2022 ; Mandaci and Cagli 2022 ; Espinosa-Méndez and Arias 2021 ). Christie and Huang ( 1995 ) observed that investor herding becomes more evident during market uncertainties. Hwang and Salmon ( 2004 ) noted that investors are less likely to exhibit herding during crises compared to stable market periods when confidence in future market prospects is higher. The COVID-19 pandemic, as a major market disruptor, necessitates that investors pay close attention to market fundamentals before making investment decisions. Recent studies suggest that an overload of COVID-19 information could lead to irrational decision-making, potentially challenging the EMH by influencing herding behavior (Jiang et al. 2022 ; Mandaci and Cagli 2022 ). This highlights the importance for investors to be aware of market information asymmetry changes, such as those triggered by the COVID-19 outbreak, which could negatively impact their investment portfolios by altering their herding tendencies. This effect may be more pronounced among individual investors than institutional ones (Metawa et al. 2018 ). A yet unexplored area is the extent to which COVID-19 pandemic information sharing amplifies the herding behavior among investors during investment decision-making processes (Mandaci and Cagli 2022 ).

COVID-19 pandemic information sharing moderating the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decisions

Recent research indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic has notably influenced behavioral biases among investors, affecting their decision-making processes (Betthäuser et al. 2023 ; Vasileiou 2020 ). Since the pandemic’s onset, investors have shown increased sensitivity to pandemic-related news or developments, leading to intensified behavioral biases. This heightened sensitivity poses challenges to investors’ abilities to respond effectively. Specifically, information related to economic uncertainty, infection rates, and vaccination progress has shifted investor sentiment regarding risk perception (Gao et al. 2023 ). Additionally, pandemic news has altered the risk perception of overconfident investors, who previously may have underestimated the risks associated with COVID-19 (Bouteska et al. 2023 ). The increased uncertainty and market volatility triggered by COVID-19 news have also prompted investors to adapt their reactions based on new information, potentially fostering more rational decision-making (Jiang et al. 2022 ). The rapid spread of COVID-19-related news has been shown to diminish mimicry in investment decisions (Nguyen et al. 2023 ). This indicates that viral news about the pandemic makes investors more discerning regarding risk perceptions and investment strategies, moving away from mere herd behavior. Based on this discussion, the study proposes that COVID-19 pandemic information sharing acts as a moderating factor in the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decisions.

Sociodemographic factors and investment decision

The influence of demographic factors like gender, age, income, and marital status on investor behavior is well-documented in financial literature. However, examining these relationships within specific geographical contexts—such as countries, regions, states, and provinces—reveals that cultural values, beliefs, and experiences may blur the distinctions between human and cognitive biases in terms of their nuanced impacts. Evidence shows that certain demographic groups, particularly young male investors with lower portfolio values from regions less developed in terms of education and income, are more prone to overconfidence and familiarity bias in their trading activities. Conversely, investors with higher education levels and female investors are inclined to trade less frequently, resulting in better investment returns (Barber and Odean 2000 ; Gervais and Odean 2001 ; Glaser and Weber 2007 ).

This study’s findings further suggest that with increased stock market experience, investors tend to discount emotional factors, leading to more rational investment choices. Nonetheless, experience alone does not appear to markedly influence the decision-making process among investors (Al-Hilu et al. 2017 ; Metawa et al. 2019 ).

In summary, demographic variables such as age, gender, and education significantly impact investment decisions, especially when considered alongside behavioral aspects like investor sentiment, overconfidence, and herd behavior. Gaining insight into these dynamics is crucial for investors, financial advisors, and policymakers to devise effective investment strategies and enhance financial literacy.

Research methodology

Data and sampling.

The research methodology outlines the strategy for achieving the study’s objectives. This research adopted a quantitative approach, utilizing a survey method (questionnaire) to examine the behavioral biases of individual investors in Pakistan during the COVID-19 pandemic. The target population comprised individual investors from Punjab province, specifically those interested in capital investments. Data were collected through convenient sampling techniques. A total of 750 questionnaires were distributed via an online survey (Google Form) to investors in four major cities of Punjab province: Karachi, Lahore, Islamabad, and Faisalabad. Initially, 257 respondents completed the survey following follow-up reminder emails. Out of these, 223 responses were deemed usable, yielding a valid response rate of 29.73% for further analysis (Saunders et al. 2012 ).

To mitigate potential biases during the data collection process, we conducted analyses for non-response and common method biases. Non-response bias, which arises when there is a significant difference between early and late respondents in a survey, was addressed by comparing the mean scores of early and late respondents using the independent samples t -test (Armstrong and Overton 1977 ). Results (see Table 1 ) indicated no statistically significant ( p > 0.05) difference between early and late responses, suggesting that response bias was not a significant issue in the dataset.

Furthermore, to assess the potential threat of common method variance, we applied Harman’s single-factor test, a widely used method to evaluate common method biases in datasets (Podsakoff et al. 2003 ). This technique is aimed at identifying systematic biases that could compromise the validity of the scale. Through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) conducted without rotation, it was determined that no single factor accounted for a variance greater than the threshold (i.e., 50%). Consequently, common method variance was not considered a problem in the dataset, ensuring the reliability of the findings.

Figure 1 illustrates the framework of the model established for regression and moderating analyses that reveal the interactions between behavioral biases, investment decisions and COVID-19 pandemic information sharing.

Covid-19 pandemic informing sharing.

Measures for behavioral biases

A close-ended questionnaire based on five-point Likert measurement scales was prepared scaling (1= “strongly disagree” to 5= “strongly agree”) to operationalize the behavioral biases of investors. The first predictor is investor sentiments. It refers to investors’ beliefs and perspectives related to future cash flows or discourses of specific assets. It is a crucial behavioral factor that often drives the market movements, especially during pandemic. We used the modified 5-items scale from the study of (Metawa et al. 2018 ; Baker and Wurgler 2006 ). Second important behavioral factor is overconfidence, which measured the tendency of decision-makers to unwittingly give excessive weight to the judgment of knowledge and correctness of information possessed and ignore the public information (Lichtenstein and Fischhoff 1977 ; Metawa et al. 2018 ). This construct was measured by using the 3-items scale developed by Dittrich et al. ( 2005 ). In line with the studies of (see for example (De Bondt and Thaler 1985 ; Metawa et al. 2018 ), we opted the 4-items scale to measure the over/under reactions. It illustrates that investors systematically overreact to unexpected news, and this leads to the violation of market efficiency. They conclude that investors attach great importance to past performance, ignoring trends back to the average of that performance (Boubaker et al. 2014 ). Last, herding behavior effect means theoretical set-up suggesting that investment managers are imitating the strategy of others despite having exclusive information. Such managers prefer to make decisions according to the connected group to avoid the risk of reputational damage (Scharfstein and Stein 1990 ). In sense, a modified scale was anchored to examine the herd behavior of investors from the studies of Bikhchandani and Sharma ( 2000 ) and Metawa et al. ( 2018 ).

Measures for COVID-19 pandemic information sharing

To assess the moderating effect of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing, it was examined in terms of uncertainty, fear, and perceived risk associated with the virus (Kiruba and Vasantha 2021 ). Previous studies indicate that COVID-19 news and developments have markedly affected the behavioral biases of investors (Jiang et al. 2022 ; Nguyen et al. 2023 ). To this end, an initial scale was developed to measure the moderating effect of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing. The primary reason for creating a new scale was that existing scales lacked clarity and were not specifically designed to assess how anchoring behavioral biases affect investment decisions. Subsequently, a self-developed scale was refined with input from a panel of experts, including two academicians specializing in neuro or behavioral finance and two investors with expertise in the capital market, to ensure the scale’s face and content validity regarding COVID-19 pandemic information sharing. They reviewed the scale in terms of format, content, and wording. Based on their comprehensive review, minor modifications were made, particularly aligning the scale with pandemic news and developments to accurately measure the impact of the COVID-19 health crisis on investors’ behavioral biases. Ultimately, a four-item scale, employing a five-point Likert scale (1= “strongly disagree” to 5= “strongly agree”), focusing on COVID-19 related aspects (e.g., infection rates, lockdowns, vaccine development, and government stimulus packages) was utilized to operationalize the construct of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing (Bin-Nashwan and Muneeza 2023 ; Li and Cao 2021 ).

I believe that increasing information about rate of COVID-19 infections influenced my investment decisions.

I believe that increasing information about COVID-19 lockdowns influenced my investment decisions.

I believe that increasing information about COVID-19 vaccinations development, influenced my investment decisions, and

I believe that increasing information about government stimulus packages influenced my investment decisions.

Measures for investment decisions

To measure investment decision, the modified five points Likert scale ranging from (1= “strongly disagree” to 5= “strongly agree”) has been opted from the study of Metawa et al. ( 2018 ).

Hypotheses of study

The hypotheses of the study regarding regression analysis and moderating analyses are as follows in Table 2 :

The hypotheses outlined above were tested using regression analyses and moderating analyses. To reveal the clustering tendencies of investors exhibiting similar behaviors, cognitive biases, and sociodemographic variables, the feature importance values were investigated using K-means clustering analyses. Furthermore, findings and recommendations were provided to policymakers using agent-based models to develop policy suggestions within the scope of these hypotheses, offering insights for academic purposes.

Demographic profile of respondents

Table 3 provides a brief demographic profile of respondents.

Based on the percentages presented in Table 3 , the study primarily focuses on a specific demographic profile. Most participants were 20–30 years old (61.0%) with a higher educational background, particularly a master’s degree (67.3%). They were mostly salaried individuals (56.5%), male (61.0%), and identified as seasonal investors (63.7%). The investment objective of this group was mostly focused on growth and income (37.2%), while wealth creation (41.3%) was their primary purpose for investing. They preferred to invest equally in medium-term (43.5%) and long-term (28.3%) periods and considered high returns (38.6%) as the primary factor before investing. They received investment advice primarily from family and friends (44.8%) and social media (29.6%). Overall, the study indicates that the sample consisted of younger, male, salaried individuals with higher education levels who rely on personal networks and social media for investment advice. Their investment objectives are focused on wealth creation through growth and income, with an equal preference for medium and long-term investments.

Analysis and results

Descriptive summary.

Table 4 outlines the measures used to evaluate the constructs of the study, detailing the number of items for each construct, mean values, standard deviations, zero-order bivariate correlations among the variables, and Cronbach’s Alpha values. The evaluation encompasses a total of 29 items spread across six constructs: investor sentiments (5 items), overconfidence (3 items), over/under reaction (4 items), herding theory (3 items), investment decision (10 items), and COVID-19 information impact (4 items). The mean scores for these items fall between 3.535 and 3.779, with standard deviations ranging from 0.877 to 0.965.

Parallel coordinates (see Figs. 2 – 5 ) visualization is employed as a method to depict high-dimensional data on a two-dimensional plane, proving particularly beneficial for datasets with a large number of features or attributes. This technique involves the use of vertical axes to represent each feature, connected by horizontal lines that represent individual data points. This visualization method facilitates the identification of patterns, detection of clusters or outliers, and discovery of correlations among the features. Therefore, parallel coordinates visualization is instrumental in analyzing complex datasets, aiding in the informed decision-making process based on the insights obtained.

Strongly disagree (CIS1) choice parallel coordinates.

Disagree (CIS2) choice parallel coordinates.

Agree (CIS3) choice parallel coordinates.

Strongly agree (CIS4) choice parallel coordinates.

The analysis of responses to the COVID-19 information sharing questions reveals a significant correlation with the second and fourth-level responses concerning cognitive biases, including investor sentiment, overconfidence, over/under reaction, and herding behavior. This observation leads to two key insights. Firstly, participants demonstrate an ability to perceive, respond to, and comprehend the nuances of their investment decisions as related to investor sentiment, overconfidence, over/under reaction, and herding behavior. Consequently, they show a propensity to make clear decisions, indicating agreement or disagreement in their responses. Secondly, it is noted that individuals who acknowledge being significantly influenced by COVID-19 news tend to adopt more balanced investment strategies concerning these cognitive biases. Additionally, younger individuals, particularly those self-employed or not professionally investing, who show a preference for long-term value investments, are more inclined to exhibit these tendencies.

The value of the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was calculated to investigate the nature, strength and relationship between variables. The results of correlation analysis reveal that all the constructs positively correlated.

To investigate the interconnections among variables in the dataset, correlations were computed and illustrated through a network graph. The correlation matrix’s values served as the basis for edge weights in the graph, with more robust correlations depicted by thicker lines (see Fig. 6a ). Each variable received a unique color, and connections showcasing higher correlations utilized a distinct color scheme to enhance visual clarity. This method offers a graphical depiction of the intricate relationships among various variables, facilitating the discovery of patterns and insights that might remain obscured within a conventional correlation matrix.

a Correlation diagraphs and matrix. b Correlation diagraphs and matrix.

The correlation analysis revealed a pronounced relationship between cognitive biases (such as investor sentiments, overconfidence, herd behavior, and investment decisions), COVID-19 information sharing, and socio-demographic factors (including age group, occupation, gender, educational qualifications, type of investor, investment objectives, investment purposes, preferred investment duration, factors considered prior to investing, and sources of investment advice). A correlation matrix graph was constructed to further elucidate these correlations, assigning different colors to each variable for visual differentiation (see Fig. 6b ). The thickness of the lines in the graph correlates with the strength of the relationships, indicating variables with high correlation more prominently.

These findings underscore the interconnected nature of the study variables, demonstrating that cognitive biases and socio-demographic factors exert a considerable impact on investment decisions. This analytical approach highlights the complexity of investor behavior and underscores the multifaceted influences on investment choices, providing valuable insights for understanding how various factors interact within the investment decision-making process.

Reliability test

For reliability test, the Cronbach alpha values were examined to check the internal consistency of the measure. The internal consistency of an instrument tends to indicate whether a metric or an indicator measure what it is intended to measure (Creswell 2009 ). The Cronbach’s alpha greater than 0.7 indicates that all the items or the questions regarding the respective variable are good, highly correlated and reliable. The calculated Cronbach coefficient value for Investor sentiments (alpha = 0.888), over confidence (alpha = 0.827), over/under reaction (alpha = 0.858), herding behavior theory (alpha = 0.741), Investment decision (alpha = 0.933) and COVID-19 (alpha = 0.782) indicates that all of the constructs are reliable.

Validity test

Validity refers to the extent to which an instrument accurately measures or performs what it is designed to measure (Kothari 2004 ). To ensure the validity of the questionnaire and its constructs, the researcher engaged in a comprehensive literature review, sought the advice of consultants, and incorporated feedback from other professionals in the field. Additionally, the concepts of convergent validity and discriminant validity were evaluated to further assess the instrument’s validity.

Convergent validity assesses the extent to which items that are theoretically related to a single construct are, in fact, related in practice (Wang et al. 2017 ). To determine convergent validity, factor loading, Average Variance Extracted (AVE), and Composite Reliability (CR) were calculated. According to Hair et al. ( 1998 ), factor loading values should exceed 0.60, composite reliability should be 0.70 or higher, and AVE should surpass 0.50 to confirm adequate convergent validity.

Table 5 demonstrates that all constructs utilized in this study surpass these threshold values, indicating strong convergent validity. This suggests that the items within each construct are consistently measuring the same underlying structure, reinforcing the validity of the questionnaire’s design and the constructs it aims to measure.

Discriminant validity measures the degree that the concepts are distinct from each other (Bagozzi et al. 1991 ) and it is evident that if alpha value of a construct is greater than the average correlation of the construct with other variables in model, the existence of discriminant validity exist (Ghiselli et al. 1981 ).

Hypotheses testing

To examine the conditional moderating effect of COVID-19 on the influence of behavioral factors (investor sentiments, overconfidence, over/under reaction, and herding behavior) on investment decision-making, moderation analysis was conducted using the Process Macro (Model 1) for SPSS, as developed by Hayes, with bootstrapping samples at 95% confidence intervals. According to Hayes ( 2018 ), the analysis first explores the direct impact of the behavioral factors on investment decisions. Subsequently, it assesses the indirect influence exerted by the moderating variable (COVID-19). This two-step approach allows for a comprehensive understanding of how COVID-19 modifies the relationship between investors’ behavioral biases and their decision-making processes, shedding light on the extent to which the pandemic acts as a moderating factor in these dynamics.

For this study the mathematical model to test moderating role of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing can be explained as:

Y = Investment decisions (Dependent variable)

β 0 = Intercept

X 1 = Investment sentiments (Independent variable)

X 2 = Overconfidence (Independent variable)

X 3 = Over/under reaction (Independent variable)

X 4 = Herding behavior (Independent variable)

β 1 X 1 = Intercept of investors sentiments

β 2 X 2 = Intercept of overconfidence

β 3 X 3 = Intercept of over/under reaction

β 4 X 4 = Intercept of herding behavior

(X 1 * COVID-19) = Investors’ sentiments and moderation effect of COVID-19 information

(X 2 * COVID-19) = Overconfidence and moderation effect of COVID-19 information

(X 3 * COVID-19) = Over/under reaction and moderation effect of COVID-19 information

(X 4 * COVID-19) = Herding behavior and moderation effect of COVID-19 information

μ = Residual term.

Direct effect

In Table 6 , the direct effect of the independent variables on the dependent variable demonstrates that the behavioral factors (investor sentiments, overconfidence, over/under reaction, and herding behavior) significantly influence investment decision (ID) with beta values of 0.961, 0.867, 0.884, and 0.698, respectively. The confidence interval (CI) values presented in Table 6 confirm these relationships are statistically significant. The positive and significant outcomes underline that behavioral factors critically impact investors’ decision-making attitudes. Consequently, Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4 (H1, H2, H3, and H4) are accepted, affirming the substantial role of investor sentiments, overconfidence, over/under reaction, and herding behavior in shaping investment decisions.

Indirect moderating effect

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated risks, the impact of behavioral factors (investor sentiments, overconfidence, over/under reaction, and herding behavior) on investment decisions tends to diminish. The findings presented in Table 6 and illustrated in Fig. 7 indicate that COVID-19 information sharing significantly and negatively moderates the relationship between these factors and investment decisions, leading to the acceptance of Hypotheses 5, 6, 7, and 8 (H5, H6, H7, and H8). The negative beta values underscore that the presence of COVID-19 adversely influences investors’ behavior, steering them away from rational investment decisions. This demonstrates that the pandemic context acts as a moderating factor, altering how behavioral biases impact investment choices, ultimately guiding investors towards more cautious or altered decision-making processes.

Moderating effect of Covid-19 pandemic information sharing.

K-means clustering analysis

K-means clustering analysis is utilized to uncover natural groupings within datasets by analyzing similarities between observations. This technique is especially beneficial for managing large and complex datasets as it reveals patterns and relationships among variables that may not be immediately evident. In this study, K-means clustering helps identify natural groupings based on socio-demographic factors, cognitive biases regarding investment decisions, and COVID-19 pandemic information sharing, thereby offering insights into the data’s underlying structure and identifying potential patterns or relationships among key variables.

The cluster analysis aims to ascertain the feature importance value of groups with similar investor behaviors, which is crucial for determining agents’ investment functions in subsequent agent-based modeling. Selecting the appropriate number of clusters in the K-means algorithm is essential, yet challenging, as different numbers of clusters can yield varying results (Li and Wu 2012 ).

Two prevalent methods for determining the optimal number of clusters are:

Elbow Method: This approach involves running the K-means algorithm with varying cluster numbers and calculating the total sum of squared errors (SSE) for each. SSE represents the squared distances of each data point from its cluster’s centroid. Plotting the SSE values against the number of clusters reveals a point known as the “elbow,” where the rate of SSE decrease markedly slows, indicating the optimal cluster number (Syakur et al. 2018 ).

Silhouette Analysis: Not mentioned directly in the narrative, but it’s another method that measures how similar an object is to its own cluster compared to other clusters. The silhouette score ranges from −1 to 1, where a high value indicates the object is well matched to its own cluster and poorly matched to neighboring clusters.

The sklearn library provides tools for implementing the elbow method and silhouette analysis. For example, the code snippet described applies the elbow method by varying the number of clusters from 1 to 10 and calculating SSE for each scenario. The optimal number of clusters is identified by selecting a value near the elbow point on the resulting plot.

After clustering, the analysis progresses by using the fit () method from sklearn’s K-Means class to cluster the data, determine each cluster’s center coordinates, and assign each data point to a cluster. Feature importance values can be calculated using the Extra Trees Classifier class from sklearn, and these values can be visualized through a line graph.

Finally, to illustrate the clusters’ membership to the CIS1, CIS2, CIS3, and CIS4 inputs as a color scale bar, the seaborn library is used (see Fig. 8 (top) and Fig. 8 (bottom)). This involves calculating the average membership values for each cluster and visualizing these averages, providing a clear depiction of how each cluster associates with the different inputs, enriching the analysis of investor behaviors and their responses to COVID-19 information sharing.

Elbow method sum of squared error class determination (top) and clustering analysis results (bottom).

After employing a network diagram constructed from a correlation matrix to elucidate the interrelationships among variables, and utilizing the Elbow method to ascertain the optimal number of clusters, the K-means clustering algorithm was applied (see Fig. 9 ). This approach successfully identified three distinct clusters, highlighting the variables that exerted a significant influence on these clusters. Notably, the COVID-19 pandemic information sharing variable, along with its corresponding CIS1, CIS2, CIS3, and CIS4 values, emerged as significant factors. The analysis indicated that overconfidence and overreaction were the predominant factors in crucial clustering, alongside cognitive biases and investment strategies that lead to similar behaviors among investors and varying levels of impact from COVID-19.

Cluster analysis feature importance value results.

Furthermore, sociodemographic factors such as age, occupation, and investor type were also identified as influential determinants. Leveraging these insights, policymakers and researchers can develop an agent-based model that incorporates herd behavior, along with age and income levels categorized by occupation, to effectively simulate market dynamics. This approach facilitates a comprehensive understanding of how different factors, particularly those related to the COVID-19 pandemic, influence investor behavior and market movements, thereby enabling the formulation of more informed strategies and policies.

An ingenious agent-based simulation for herding behavior

In this study, the findings of behavioral economics and finance research may contain results that are easy to interpret for policymakers but may involve certain difficulties in practical implementation. Specifically, for policymakers, an agent-based model has been created (see Appendix 1 for pseudo codes. In case, requested python codes are available). In a model consisting of 223 agents who trade on a single stock, prototypes of investors have been created based on the analysis presented here, and characteristics such as age group and income status, which are relatively easy to access or predict regarding their socio-demographic profiles, have been taken into account in the herd behavior function, considering the decision to follow the group or make independent decisions. Younger and lower-income agents were allowed to exhibit a greater tendency to follow the group, while 50 successful transactions were monitored to determine in which trend of stock price increase or decrease the balance of the most successful agent was increased or decreased (Gervais and Odean 2001 ).

In addressing the influence of age and income status on herding behavior, it is imperative to underscore the nuanced interplay between various socio-economic and psychological factors within our agent-based model framework. The model’s robustness stems from its capacity to simulate a range of investor behaviors by integrating key determinants such as investor sentiment, overconfidence, reaction to market events, and socio-demographic characteristics. Herein we expound on the contributory elements:

Investor Sentiment (IS1–IS5)

The model encapsulates the variability of investor sentiment, which oscillates with age and income, influencing individuals’ financial perspectives and risk propensities. Younger investors’ sentiment may tilt towards optimism driven by a more extensive investment horizon, while lower-income investors’ sentiment could lean towards caution, primarily driven by the pressing requirement for financial dsecurity (Baker and Wurgler 2007 ).

Overconfidence (OF1–OF5)

The tendency towards overconfidence is dynamically modeled, particularly among younger investors who may overrate their market acumen and predictive capabilities. This overconfidence may also manifest among lower-income investors as a psychological compensatory mechanism for resource inadequacy (Malmendier and Tate 2005 ).

Over/Under Reaction (OUR1–OUR5)

The model accounts for the influence of age and income on the velocity and extent of response to market stimuli. Inexperienced or financially restricted investors may be prone to overreactions due to a lack of market exposure or intensified economic strain (Daniel et al. 1998 ).

Herding Behavior (HB1–HB4)

Within the simulated environment, herding is more pronounced among younger investors, possibly due to peer influence, and among lower-income investors who may seek safety in conformity (Bikhchandani et al. 1992 ).

Investment Decision (ID1–ID10)

The model intricately reflects the complexities of investment decisions influenced by age-specific factors such as projected earnings and lifecycle influences. Investors with limited income may exhibit a predilection for security, swaying their investment choices (Yao and Curl 2011 ).

COVID-19 Information Sharing (CIS1–CIS4)

The pandemic era’s nuances are integrated into the model, acknowledging that younger investors could be more susceptible to digitally disseminated information, which, in turn, impacts their investment decisions. The credibility and source of information are also calibrated based on income levels (Shiller 2020 ).

Socio-demographic factors

Age: The model simulates younger investors’ reliance on the conduct of others, utilizing it as a heuristic substitute for experience (Dobni and Racine 2016 ).

Occupation: It captures how occupational background can broaden or restrict access to information and influence herding tendencies (Hong et al. 2000 ).

Gender: Gender disparities are incorporated, reflecting on investment styles where men may be more disposed to herding due to overconfidence (Barber and Odean 2001 ).

Qualification (Qualif.): The model acknowledges that higher education and financial literacy levels can curtail herding by fostering self-reliant decision-making (Lusardi and Mitchell 2007 ).

Investor Type (InvTyp): It differentiates between retail and institutional investors, noting that limited resources might push retail investors towards herding (Nofsinger and Sias 1999 ).

Investment Objective (InvObj): The model recognizes that short-term objectives might amplify herding as investors chase swift gains (Odean 1998 ).

Purpose: It contemplates the conservative herding behavior that is aligned with goals like retirement savings (Yao and Curl 2011 ).

Investment Horizon (Horizon): A lengthier investment horizon is modeled to potentially dampen herding tendencies (Kaustia and Knüpfer 2008 ).

Factors Considered Before Investing (factors): The model simulates a range of investment considerations, including risk tolerance and expected returns, which influence herding propensities (Shefrin and Statman 2000 ).

Source of Investment Advice (source): The influence of advice sources, such as analysts or financial media, on herding is also captured within the model (Tetlock 2007 ).

In conclusion, the agent-based model we present is meticulously designed to reflect the intricate fabric of financial market behavior. It is particularly attuned to the multi-layered aspects that drive herding, informed by empirical evidence and theoretical underpinnings that rigorously define the interrelations between investor demographics and market behavior. The aforementioned socio-economic and psychological facets provide a comprehensive backdrop against which the validity and consistency of the model are substantiated.

The following code has been prepared using Python programming language with the Mesa, Pandas, SciPy, NumPy, Random and Matplotlib libraries. This code simulates a herd behavior of stock traders in a simple market (Hunt and Thomas 2010 ; McKinney 2010 ; Harris et al. 2020 ; Virtanen et al. 2020 ; Van Rossum 2020 ; Hunter 2007 ). The simulation runs for 50-time steps, with the stock price and balance of each agent printed at each step. The decision-making process of agents in the simulation is stochastic, with agents randomly choosing to buy, sell, or follow the market trend based on their characteristics and decision-making strategy.

The Stock Trader class in the model symbolizes individual agents, each characterized by a unique ID, balance, and a stock price. These agents are equipped with a method to compute the current stock price. The step() function within each agent embodies their decision-making process, which is influenced by their current balance and the prevailing stock price. Agents have the option to buy, sell, or align with the market trend, reflecting various investment strategies.

The Herding Model class encapsulates the entire simulation framework. It generates a population of Stock Trader agents and progresses the simulation over a designated number of time steps. Within this class, the agent_decision() method orchestrates each agent’s decision-making, factoring in individual characteristics and strategies. The step() method, in turn, adjusts the stock price based on the aggregate current stock prices of all agents before executing the step() method for each agent, thereby simulating the dynamic nature of the stock market.

Socio-demographic factors, specifically age and income status, are integrated into the agent-based model simulations, drawing upon insights from Parallel Coordinates and Cluster Analysis as well as relevant literature. The simulation posits that agents of younger age and lower income are predisposed to mimicking the market trend, whereas other agents exhibit a propensity for independent decision-making. Given the stochastic nature of the decision-making process, the behavior of agents varies across different runs of the simulation, introducing an element of unpredictability.

At each time step, the simulation outputs the stock price and balance of each agent, offering a snapshot of the market dynamics at that moment. Figure 10 provides a flow diagram elucidating the operational framework of the model’s code, presenting a visual representation of how the simulation unfolds over time.

Flowchart of agent-based model.

This model architecture allows for the exploration of how socio-demographic characteristics influence investment behaviors within a simulated market environment, offering valuable insights into the mechanisms driving market trends and individual investor decisions.

Within our agent-based model (ABM), “performance” embodies multiple dimensions reflective of the agents’ investment outcomes, influenced by socio-demographic factors and behavioral biases. The provided pseudo-code conceptualizes the implementation of these facets in the model.

Metrics used to quantify agent performance

Balance trajectory.

This primary indicator tracks the evolution of each agent’s financial balance over time, reflecting the impact of their buy, sell, or market trend-following decisions (Arthur 1991 ).

Decision strategy efficacy

Evaluates the effectiveness of an agent’s decision-making strategy (‘buy’, ‘sell’, or ‘follow’), influenced by socio-demographic variables such as age and income, as delineated in the agent_decision method (Tesfatsion and Judd 2006 ).

Market trend alignment

Assesses the correlation between an agent’s balance trajectory and overall market trends, indicating successful performance if an agent’s balance increases with market prices (Shiller 2003 ).

Risk management

Infers risk management skill from the volatility of balance changes, with less volatility indicating stable and potentially successful investment strategies (Markowitz 1952 ).

Wealth accumulation

Agents are ranked by their final balance at the simulation’s end to identify the most financially successful outcomes (De Long et al. 1990 ).

Adaptive behavior

The model evaluates agents’ adaptability to market price changes, revealing their capacity to capitalize on market movements (Gode and Sunder 1993 ).

Herding influence

Considers how herding behavior impacts financial outcomes, especially for younger and lower-income agents as programmed in the Herding Model class (Bikhchandani et al. 1992 ).

These performance metrics are quantified through agents’ balance and stock price histories, updated at each simulation step. These histories offer a time series analysis of financial trajectories, enabling pattern identification such as herding tendencies or the effects of overconfidence.

The model’s realism is enhanced by parameters like young_follow_factor and low_income_follow_factor, adjusting the propensity for herding among different socio-demographic groups. This inclusion allows the model to reflect real-world dynamics where age and income significantly impact investment performance.

In conclusion, our ABM presents a detailed framework for examining investment performance’s complex nature. It integrates behavioral economics and socio-demographic data, providing insights into investor behavior under simulated market conditions.

Characteristics of agents in the agent-based model

Demographics (age and income): Consistent with the focus of our study on socio-demographic factors, each agent is characterized by age and income parameters, which influence their investment behavior, particularly their propensity towards herding. Age and income are randomly assigned within realistic bounds reflecting the demographic distribution of typical investor populations.

Cognitive biases: Agents are imbued with behavioral attributes such as overconfidence, herding instinct, and over/under-reaction tendencies to market news, reflecting the psychological dimensions of real-world investors.

Investment strategy: Each agent follows a distinct investment strategy categorized broadly as ‘buy’, ‘sell’, or ‘follow’ (herding). The strategy is influenced by the agent’s demographic characteristics and cognitive biases.

Adaptability: Agents are capable of learning and adapting to market changes over time, simulating the dynamic and evolving nature of real-world investor behavior.

Social influence: Agents are influenced by other agents’ behaviors, especially under conditions conducive to herding, modeling the social dynamics of investment communities.

Wealth and portfolio: Agents have a variable representing their wealth, which fluctuates based on investment decisions and market performance. Their portfolio composition and changes therein are also tracked, offering insights into their risk-taking and diversification behaviors.

Significance of agent-based modeling

Agent-based modeling is a powerful tool that allows researchers to simulate and analyze complex systems composed of interacting agents. Its significance and utility in various fields, including economics and finance are profound:

Complexity and emergence: ABM can capture the emergent phenomena that arise from the interactions of many individual agents, providing insights into complex market dynamics that are not apparent at the individual level (Epstein and Axtell 1996 ).

Customizability and scalability: ABMs can be tailored to include various levels of detail and complexity, allowing for the simulation of systems ranging from small groups to entire markets (Tesfatsion and Judd 2006 ).

Experimental flexibility: ABMs facilitate virtual experiments that would be impractical or impossible in the real world, enabling researchers to explore hypothetical scenarios and policy implications (Gilbert and Troitzsch 2005 ).

Realism in behavioral representation: By incorporating cognitive biases and decision-making rules, ABMs can realistically represent human behavior, providing deeper behavioral insights than models assuming perfect rationality (Hommes 2006 ).

Policy analysis and forecasting: In economics and finance, ABMs are particularly useful for policy analysis, risk assessment, and forecasting, as they can incorporate a wide range of real-world factors and individual behaviors (LeBaron and Tesfatsion 2008 ).

By integrating these agent characteristics into our ABM and considering the broader implications of agent-based modeling, our study aims to provide nuanced insights into herding behavior among investors. We believe that our approach not only aligns with best practices in the field but also significantly contributes to the understanding of complex investment behaviors and market dynamics. We trust that this expanded description addresses the reviewer’s comment and underscores the robustness and relevance of our agent-based simulation approach.

Figure 11a, b panels display the balance changes of agents with respect to stock prices, age, and income status. By coding the balance increases and decreases as +1 and −1, respectively, and employing a line graph that matches the changes in stock prices, it has become possible to provide information about the agents’ performance. In panels a and b, it is observed that agents created after the age of 37.5 have been included in the higher income group on average, and during transitions of stock prices below 12.75 units, between 17 and 20 units, and between 26 and 27.50 units, the agents’ responses to price state changes are accompanied by noticeable transitions (increases and decreases) in their portfolio states, depending on age and income status.

a Agents’ performance. b Agents’ responses.

In Fig. 12 , in the agent-based model’s 50 repeated simulations, at the 45th simulation, the stock price is 20.03 units, and the balance of agent number 74 reaches 911 units. The price-income-balance change graph for the agent throughout the 50 transactions is presented below.

Balance change according to stock price for agent 74.

Upon examining the descriptive statistics of the income for agent number 74, who diverges from the herding tendency profile of the model and is in the higher income group aged 40 and above, the highest balance value is 911 units, the lowest balance level is 732 units, the average is 799 units, and the standard deviation is 41 units. When the overall balance of the agents is investigated, it is observed that the average balance of the agents is around 84 units. Considering the existence of an agent with the lowest balance of −670 units, it can be concluded that agent number 74 has demonstrated a significantly superior performance.

Discussion and conclusion

The influence of behavioral biases on investors’ decision-making has yielded mixed findings in literature. Wan ( 2018 ) observed a positive impact of behavioral biases, considered forward-looking factors, on investment decisions. Conversely, Zulfiqar et al. ( 2018 ) noted a markedly negative impact of overconfidence on investment decisions. Similarly, Aziz and Khan ( 2016 ) explored the role of heuristic factors (representative, anchoring, overconfidence, and availability bases) and found them significantly influencing investment decision and performance. However, they reported that prospect factors (loss aversion, regret aversion, and mental accounting biases) had an insignificant impact on these outcomes.

These varied results may stem from a complex interplay of factors such as cultural differences, pandemic-related information, economic conditions, regulatory environments, historical context, and investors’ financial literacy levels, contributing to differences in how behavioral biases influence investment decisions across regions (Metawa et al. 2018 ).

This study contributes to the field of behavioral finance by revealing the moderating role of COVID-19 pandemic information sharing on the relationship between behavioral quirks and investment choices, specifically in the context of Pakistan. Key contributions include:

Investors’ sentiments

This study shows that COVID-19 pandemic information sharing significantly moderates the relationship between investors’ sentiments and their investment decisions, validating that pandemic-related information, such as infection rates and economic downturns, heavily influences investors’ sentiments and alters their risk perceptions (Anastasiou et al. 2022 ; Hsu and Tang 2022 ; Bin-Nashwan and Muneeza 2023 ; Gao et al. 2023 ; Sohail et al. 2020 ).

Overconfidence

It reveals how COVID-19 information reshapes overconfident investors’ risk perceptions, urging them to reassess their investment portfolios in light of the pandemic’s uncertainties and economic implications (Bouteska et al. 2023 ; Li and Cao 2021 ).

Over/under reaction

The study uncovers that the pandemic information moderates the relationship between over-under reaction and investment decisions, suggesting that investors adjust their reactions based on evolving pandemic information, leading to more informed and rational investment choices (Jiang et al. 2022 ).

Herd behavior

It finds that COVID-19 pandemic information significantly reduces herd behavior among investors, encouraging them to make rational decisions rather than blindly following the majority (Nguyen et al. 2023 ).

In conclusion, this study illustrates that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly moderated the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decisions. Furthermore, clustering analyses and agent-based outcomes suggest that younger, less experienced agents prone to herding behavior exhibit a higher propensity for such behavior and demonstrate lower performance in agent-based models. These findings pave the way for further research into additional cognitive biases and socio-demographic variables’ effects on investment decisions.

Implications

This study contributes to the field of behavioral finance that COVID-19 pandemic information sharing significantly moderates the relationship between behavioral biases (e.g., investors’ sentiments, overconfidence, over/under reaction, and herd behavior) and investment decisions. Therefore, policy implications stem from findings are substantial, and thus addressing behavioral biases during COVID-19 pandemic to mitigate the market inefficiencies and promote better decision-making. First, this study suggests that investing in comprehensive financial education plans will enhance the financial literacy of investors and enable them to better recognize the behavioral biases during times of uncertainty and crises. Second, findings imply that accurate and transparent information sharing about COVID-19 pandemic can better mitigate the behavioral biases, especially government interventions (e.g., National Command and Coordination Centre) ensuring reliable information can lead the investors to make more rational and informed investment decisions during the time of uncertainty and crises. Last, findings provide insights to policy makers that pandemic news and developments significantly influenced behavioral biases of investment decisions (Khurshid et al. 2021 ). For example, news about number of causalities, infection rates, vaccine progress, government stimulus packages, or stock market downturns had immediate effects on behavioral biases especially when an investor is overconfidence, over/under reaction, and herd behavior. In this sense, enhancing information transparency about COVID-19 news in media can reduce the influence of sensationalized news on investor decisions.

Limitations and call for future research

This study significantly enhances the understanding of behavioral factors’ impact on investors’ decision-making processes, presenting important findings within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. While these contributions are notable, the research is subject to certain limitations that pave the way for future exploration and deeper investigation into this complex field.

Firstly, the study underscores the necessity for further research to validate its results through larger sample sizes and a more diverse array of respondents. Adopting a longitudinal design could prove particularly insightful, enabling an analysis of behavioral biases across different stages of the pandemic and providing a dynamic perspective on how investor behaviors evolve over time.

In addition, there’s a highlighted opportunity for future studies to delve into the behaviors influencing institutional investor decisions within Pakistan. The complex decision-making processes and investment portfolios of institutional investors, coupled with challenges like data availability and the heterogeneity among institutions, present a fertile ground for investigation. Such research could unravel how various factors, including market conditions and macroeconomic assessments, impact institutional investment strategies.

The study also points out the need to broaden the investigation to include other potential behavioral factors beyond those focused on in the current research, such as loss aversion, personality traits, anchoring, and recency biases. Expanding the scope of behavioral factors examined could significantly enrich the behavioral finance field by offering a more comprehensive view of the influences on investment decisions.

Moreover, while the insights gained from a Pakistani context during the COVID-19 pandemic are invaluable, extending the research to include global (e.g., China, Japan, USA) and other emerging markets (e.g., BRICS) would enhance understanding of the universality or specificity of behavioral biases in investment decisions across various economic, cultural, and regulatory environments.

Lastly, the study’s reliance on quantitative data points to the potential benefits of incorporating qualitative data into future research. Undertaking case studies within specific securities brokerages or investment banks could provide an in-depth investigation of investor behavior, generating new insights that could inspire further research.

To support the development of more sophisticated agent-based models and to foster collaborative research efforts, the study makes its source code available to other researchers. This openness to collaboration promises to stimulate innovative approaches to understanding and modeling investor behavior across diverse contexts, contributing to the advancement of the behavioral finance field.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Business Administration, University of the Punjab, Gujranwala Campus, Gujranwala, Pakistan

Wasim ul Rehman

Manager of Economics Research Department, Marbas Securities Co., Istanbul, Turkey

Omur Saltik

Institute of Quality and Technology Management, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan

Faryal Jalil

Department of Economics, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey

Suleyman Degirmen

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed equally to this research work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wasim ul Rehman .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

The data was collated through an online survey approach (questionnaire) during the last variant of COVID-19 where anonymity of the respondents is meticulously preserved. The respondents were not asked to provide their names, identification, address, or any other identifying elements. The authors minutely observed the ethical guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. In addition, we hereby certify that this study was conducted under the ethical approval guidelines of Office of Research Innovation and Commercialization, University of the Punjab granted under the office order No. D/ 409/ORIC dated 31-12-2021.

Informed consent

The consent of participants was obtained through consent form during the last variant of COVID-19. The consent form contains the title of study, intent of study, procedure to participate, confidentiality, voluntary participation of respondents, questions/query and consent of the respondents. The respondents were requested to provide their willingness to participate in survey on consent form via email before filling the online-surveyed (questionnaire). Further, participants were also assured that their anonymity would be maintained and that no personal information or identifying element would be disclosed. The consent form is in the supplementary files.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Consent form, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Rehman, W.u., Saltik, O., Jalil, F. et al. Viral decisions: unmasking the impact of COVID-19 info and behavioral quirks on investment choices. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 524 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03011-7

Download citation

Received : 17 June 2023

Accepted : 28 March 2024

Published : 20 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03011-7

Share this article

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

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Log in using your username and password

Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
Latest content
Current issue
BMJ Journals More You are viewing from: Google Indexer

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4166-5450 Camilla Alderighi 1 , 2 ,
Raffaele Rasoini 1 , 2 ,
Rebecca De Fiore 2 , 3 ,
Fabio Ambrosino 2 , 3 ,
Steven Woloshin 1 , 4
1 Lisa Schwartz Foundation for Truth in Medicine , Norwich , Vermont , USA
2 Alessandro Liberati Association - Cochrane Affiliate Centre , Potenza , Italy
3 Pensiero Scientifico Editore s.r.l , Roma , Italy
4 Center for Medicine and the Media, The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice , Dartmouth University , Lebanon , New Hampshire , USA
Correspondence to Dr Camilla Alderighi, Lisa Schwartz Foundation for Truth in Medicine, Norwich, Vermont, USA; camilla.alderighi{at}gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112814

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Cardiovascular Diseases
PUBLIC HEALTH
Cardiovascular Abnormalities

Medical research gets plenty of media attention. Unfortunately, the attention is often problematic, frequently failing to provide readers with information needed to understand findings or decide whether to believe them. 1 Unless journalists highlight study cautions and limitations, avoid spin 2 and overinterpretation of findings, the public may draw erroneous conclusions about the reliability and actionability of the research. Coverage of observational research may be especially challenging given inherent difficulty in inferring causation, a limitation that is rarely mentioned in medical journals articles or corresponding news. 3 We used news coverage of a retrospective cohort study, published in Nature Medicine in 2022, 4 as a case study to assess news reporting quality. The index study used national data from US Department of Veteran Affairs to characterise the post-acute cardiovascular manifestations of COVID-19. We chose this study because of its potential public health impact (ie, reporting increased cardiovascular diseases after even mild COVID-19 infection) and its enormous media attention: one of the highest Altmetric scores ever (>20 k, coverage in over 600 news outlets and 40 000 tweets). Our study supplements a previous analysis limited to Italian news. 5

Supplemental material

Using Altmetric news page, we collected the news stories released in the first month after index study publication. We excluded duplicate articles, articles where the index study was not the main topic, articles<150 words or with unreachable link, paywalled articles and articles aimed at healthcare professionals. We translated articles not in English or Italian into Italian using Google Translate. Four raters (two physicians and two scientific journalists) independently analysed the included news articles using the coding scheme in online supplemental appendix 1 . Outcome was the proportion of news articles failing to meet each of the quality measures. Inter-rater agreement across all items was substantial (Fleiss’ kappa=0.78). Coder disagreements were resolved through discussion.

Almost all news stories (95 of 96, 99%) failed to mention the causal inference limitation or used causal language (eg, “Covid causes substantial long-term cardiovascular risks.”). 69 of 96 (72%) made unsupported recommendations (eg, “Based on the results of this study, I recommend that everyone who has been infected with Covid-19 […] get a cardiovascular workup within 12 months.”). 62 of 88 (70%) employed spin, for example, by reporting only relative risks (eg, “Overall, for all cardiovascular diseases combined, the risk after Covid-19 infection increased by 55%.”). 84 of 96 (87%) employed fear mongering (eg, “The results of the paper have shocked other researchers.”). 75 of 96 (78%) failed to undertake a basic critical evaluation of the study (eg, mention population characteristics and study context). More quality measure details and examples from the news are given in table 1 .

View inline

Quality measures investigated in the analysis and examples from the news

This case study highlights how uncritical reporting of observational research in the news can result in dissemination of poor-quality information to the public. In this case, a high-impact study described an increased incidence of cardiovascular diseases after COVID-19, including coronary disease, myocarditis, pericarditis, heart failure, dysrhythmias, cerebrovascular disease and thromboembolic disease. Because they were based on observational analyses of US Veterans cohorts, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. Nevertheless, many of the subsequent news reports used inappropriate causal language and made recommendations unsupported by the research.

In this analysis, we focused on issues about reporting, that is what people eventually read. However, upstream sources are part of the problem 8 : for instance, the quality of reporting in the case study press release 9 reflects what we have observed in the news (eg, from an investigator quoted in the press release: “Because of the chronic nature of these conditions, they will likely have long-lasting consequences for patients and health systems and also have broad implications on economic productivity and life expectancy”).

The Nature Medicine paper was timely and of great interest to a public concerned about the sequelae of COVID-19. Not surprisingly, it received extraordinary coverage in the media. Careful, balanced news coverage could have helped the public understand that there might be long-term harms of COVID-19. Unfortunately, instead, as documented in our analysis, most media tended to overstate the certainty of results, likely generating substantial public anxiety about an inevitable epidemic of post-COVID-19 cardiovascular disease, and that is bad news.

Our analysis has limitations, such as, being restricted to a single study, unpaywalled articles and using a subjective selection of quality measures—albeit consistent with minimum quality standards used to judge reporting on observational research. 6 7

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication.

Not applicable.

Ethics approval

Pérez Gaxiola G , et al
Boutron I ,
Bolland MJ ,
Bowe B , et al
Rasoini R ,
Ambrosino F ,
De Fiore R , et al
von Elm E ,
Altman DG ,
Egger M , et al
Schwitzer G
Schwartz LM ,
Woloshin S ,
Andrews A , et al
Nordemberg T

Supplementary materials

Supplementary data.

This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

Data supplement 1
Data supplement 2

X @camialderighi

Contributors All authors contributed to conception, planning, design and conduct; acquisition, analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content; and administrative, technical or material support and had full access to all the data in the study. CA, FA, RDF and RR: contributed to statistical analysis and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. CA and RR contributed equally to the creation of this manuscript; the order of their authorship is entirely arbitrary. CA, RR and SW: contributed to supervision.

Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

Alzheimer's disease & dementia
Arthritis & Rheumatism
Attention deficit disorders
Autism spectrum disorders
Biomedical technology
Diseases, Conditions, Syndromes
Endocrinology & Metabolism
Gastroenterology
Gerontology & Geriatrics
Health informatics
Inflammatory disorders
Medical economics
Medical research
Medications
Neuroscience
Obstetrics & gynaecology
Oncology & Cancer
Ophthalmology
Overweight & Obesity
Parkinson's & Movement disorders
Psychology & Psychiatry
Radiology & Imaging
Sleep disorders
Sports medicine & Kinesiology
Vaccination
Breast cancer
Cardiovascular disease
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Colon cancer
Coronary artery disease
Heart attack
Heart disease
High blood pressure
Kidney disease
Lung cancer
Multiple sclerosis
Myocardial infarction
Ovarian cancer
Post traumatic stress disorder
Rheumatoid arthritis
Schizophrenia
Skin cancer
Type 2 diabetes
Full List »

share this!

April 17, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

Older adults with diabetes experienced functional decline during the COVID-19 pandemic, research finds

by University of Toronto

Researchers found that approximately one in five older Canadian adults with diabetes and no pre-pandemic functional limitations developed functional limitations for the first time during the COVID-19 pandemic. Functional limitations refer to difficulties with basic mobility-related tasks, such as walking two to three blocks, standing up from a chair, or climbing stairs. In comparison, only one in eight of their peers without diabetes developed functional limitations during the pandemic. The study was published in the Canadian Journal of Diabetes .

"Functional status is an important predictor of longevity and quality of life among older adults, and individuals with diabetes face a higher risk of functional decline than the general population," said first author Andie MacNeil, a research assistant at the Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work (FIFSW) and the Institute for Life Course and Aging at the University of Toronto.

"Because the pandemic exacerbated many risk factors for functional decline, such as social isolation and physical inactivity, we wanted to examine changes in functional status among this population."

The study's sample came from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging, a national longitudinal study of older Canadians. Respondents with diabetes were 53% more likely to develop at least one functional limitation during the pandemic compared to respondents without diabetes. Even after taking into account major risk factors for functional decline, such as such as physical activity, obesity, smoking, and other chronic health conditions, older adults with diabetes still faced a 28% higher risk of developing functional limitations .

"It is important for health professionals to encourage their older patients, particularly those with diabetes, to engage in behaviors that can help maintain their functional status, such as regular physical activity," said co-author Susanna Abraham Cottagiri, doctoral candidate at the School of Medicine at Queens University.

The study also found that socioeconomic factors were associated with functional limitations among older adults with and without diabetes. When compared to those with an annual household income of $100,000 or more, older adults with diabetes with an income of $20,000 or less had a five-fold higher risk of developing at least one functional limitation.

Even among those without diabetes, those with an income of $20,000 or less had double the risk of developing at least one functional limitation compared to those with an annual income of $100,000 or more.

"While socioeconomic status is an important predictor of functional decline among those both with and without diabetes, the magnitude of this relationship is much greater for respondents with diabetes," said co-author Ying Jiang, a senior epidemiologist at the Public Health Agency of Canada.

The authors also examined the probabilities of functional limitations across various patient characteristics such as sex, diabetes status, and household income, and then stratified into several risk factors, such as age, physical activity level, smoking status, multimorbidity, and weight. Across various patient profiles, socioeconomic status was a consistent driver of functional status.

Co-author Professor Paul Villeneuve at the Department of Neuroscience and the CHAIM Research Center, Carleton University, hypothesized the possible reason for this pattern: "People with low socioeconomic status face disproportionate stressors over their lifetime that may adversely impact their physical functioning in older age, such as working more physically demanding jobs, worse nutrition, and living in areas with less greenspace and walkability."

The researchers hope these findings can be used to inform interventions to promote better physical functioning among middle age and older adults.

"Combining lifestyle approaches that integrate physical activity with nutrition interventions have been shown to improve physical function in older adults with diabetes," said co-author Margaret de Groh, scientific manager at the Public Health Agency of Canada.

"Poverty remains a major barrier to nutrition and food security ," said senior author Professor Esme Fuller-Thomson at the University of Toronto's FIFSW and director of the Institute for Life Course & Aging. "It is important to think about broader strategies to decrease poverty and improve food access in Canada in order to promote better physical functioning among older adults ."

The study included 6,045 participants of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) who were free from functional limitations in the 2015–2018 wave of data collection and who provided information on their functional status during the COVID-19 pandemic (September–December 2020).

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Occupations that are cognitively stimulating may be protective against later-life dementia

Apr 20, 2024

Researchers develop a new way to safely boost immune cells to fight cancer

Apr 19, 2024

New compound from blessed thistle may promote functional nerve regeneration

New research defines specific genomic changes associated with the transmissibility of the mpox virus

New study confirms community pharmacies can help people quit smoking

Researchers discover glial hyper-drive for triggering epileptic seizures

Deeper dive into the gut microbiome shows changes linked to body weight

A new therapeutic target for traumatic brain injury

Dozens of COVID virus mutations arose in man with longest known case, research finds

Researchers explore causal machine learning, a new advancement for AI in health care

Canadians with peptic ulcer disease faced mental health challenges during COVID-19 pandemic: Study

Oct 19, 2023

Research shows older adults with a history of stroke at high risk of pandemic-induced depression

Feb 21, 2024

Canadian older adults with COPD faced high levels of depression during the COVID pandemic

Sep 20, 2023

High levels of depression found among Canadian older adults with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic

Sep 7, 2023

One in eight older adults experienced depression for the first time during the COVID-19 pandemic

Nov 24, 2022

Older adults with asthma at high risk for depression during the COVID-19 pandemic

Jan 19, 2023

Recommended for you

Siblings with unique genetic mutation help scientists progress drug search for type 1 diabetes

Apr 18, 2024

Calorie restriction study reveals complexities in how diet impacts aging

Apr 17, 2024

Mouse study finds small extracellular vesicles from young blood extend lifespan and restore physiological functions

Apr 16, 2024

New study focuses on the placenta for clues to the development of gestational diabetes

How trauma gets 'under the skin': Research investigates impaired muscle function caused by childhood trauma

Apr 15, 2024

Scientists identify pro-aging 'sugar signature' in the blood of people living with HIV

Apr 10, 2024

Let us know if there is a problem with our content

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Medical Xpress in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

Publications
Our Methods
Short Reads
Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

81% of U.S. adults – versus 46% of teens – favor parental consent for minors to use social media

More than 40 states and the District of Columbia are suing Meta , the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, alleging its platforms purposefully use addictive features that harm children’s mental health.

Amid this news, U.S. adults and teens are more likely to support than oppose requiring parental consent for minors to create a social media account and requiring people to verify their age before using these platforms, according to a pair of new Pew Research Center surveys. But adults are far more supportive than teens of these measures, as well as limiting how much time minors can spend on social media.

Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand American adults’ and teens’ views on ways social media companies could limit minors’ use of their platforms. This analysis uses data from two separate surveys, allowing us to compare the views of U.S. teens ages 13 to 17 with U.S. adults ages 18 and older.

For the analysis of teens, the Center conducted an online survey of 1,453 U.S. teens from Sept. 26 to Oct. 23, 2023, via Ipsos. Ipsos recruited the teens via their parents who were a part of its KnowledgePanel , a probability-based web panel recruited primarily through national, random sampling of residential addresses. The survey is weighted to be representative of U.S. teens ages 13 to 17 who live with parents by age, gender, race and ethnicity, household income and other categories. This research was reviewed and approved by an external institutional review board (IRB), Advarra, an independent committee of experts specializing in helping to protect the rights of research participants.

For the separate analysis of adults, the Center surveyed 8,842 U.S. adults from Sept. 25 to Oct. 1, 2023. Everyone who took part in the survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP). This online survey panel is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race and ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

Here are the questions used for this analysis, along with responses, and its methodology .

Here’s a closer look at the findings from the two new surveys – one of adults and one of teens – which we conducted in late September through October, before the states’ lawsuit against Meta.

Adults’ views on social media policies aimed at minors

A bar chart showing that most U.S. adults support parental consent and time restrictions for minors using social media sites.

Most U.S. adults (81%) say they support social media companies requiring parental consent for minors to create a social media account. About seven-in-ten favor requiring people to verify their age before using social media sites (71%) and setting limits on how much time minors can spend on these platforms (69%). Only about one-in-ten adults oppose each of these three measures.

Still, some adults are uncertain. For example, roughly one-in-five adults are unsure if companies should require age verification (18%) or set time limits for minors (17%).

Views among adults by age, party and parental status

Many social media companies do not allow those under 13 to use their sites. Still, there’s a growing movement to develop stricter age verification measures , such as requiring users to provide government-issued identification. Legislators have pushed for mandatory parental consent and time restrictions for those under 18, arguing this will help parents better monitor what their children do on social media.

Our survey finds there is strong bipartisan support for these types of policies. Clear majorities of Republicans and Democrats – including independents who lean to either party – support parental consent, time limits for minors and age verification.

A bar chart showing that young adults are less likely than older Americans to support social media policies aimed at minors.

Majorities of adults across age groups support social media companies introducing these measures. But young adults are less supportive than their older counterparts. For example, 67% of those ages 18 to 29 say social media sites should require parental consent for minors to create an account, but this share rises to 84% among those ages 30 and older.

Additionally, majorities of parents and those without children back each of these measures, though support is somewhat higher among parents.

Teens’ views on social media policies for minors

A chart showing that U.S. teens are more likely to support than oppose social media companies requiring parental consent and age verification; fewer favor time restrictions.

Building on the Center’s previous studies of youth and social media, we asked U.S. teens ages 13 to 17 about their views on these measures.

Teens are more likely to support than oppose social media companies requiring parental consent for minors to create an account (46% vs. 25%). There’s even more support for requiring people to verify their age before using these sites – 56% of teens favor this, while 16% oppose it.

But their views are more divided when it comes to setting limits on how long minors can use these sites. Similar shares of teens support and oppose this (34% vs. 36%).

For each of these policies, about three-in-ten teens report being unsure if this is something social media companies should do.

How adults’ and teens’ views on social media policies differ

A dot plot showing that majorities of U.S. adults and teens support social media companies requiring people to verify their age, but there’s a wide gap on requiring parental consent.

Adults are considerably more supportive of all three measures we asked about than are teens.

While 81% of U.S. adults support social media companies requiring parental consent for minors to create an account, that share drops to 46% among U.S. teens.

Adults are also about twice as likely as teens to support setting limits on how much time minors can spend on social media sites (69% vs. 34%).

But majorities of adults and teens alike support requiring people to verify their age before using social media sites. But on this, too, adults are more supportive than teens (71% vs. 56%).

Note: Here are the questions used for this analysis, along with responses, and its methodology .

Social Media
Technology Policy Issues
Teens & Tech

6 facts about Americans and TikTok

Whatsapp and facebook dominate the social media landscape in middle-income nations, how teens and parents approach screen time, germans stand out for their comparatively light use of social media, majorities in most countries surveyed say social media is good for democracy, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 | Media Inquiries

Research Topics

Age & Generations
Coronavirus (COVID-19)
Economy & Work
Family & Relationships
Gender & LGBTQ
Immigration & Migration
International Affairs
Internet & Technology
Methodological Research
News Habits & Media
Non-U.S. Governments
Other Topics
Politics & Policy
Race & Ethnicity
Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Terms & Conditions

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy

IMAGES

Limitations of a Study Made Easy With This Guide
What Are The Research Study's limitations, And How To Identify Them
Limitations in Research
What are Research Limitations and Tips to Organize Them
What Are The Research Study's limitations, And How To Identify Them
How to Present the Limitations of the Study Examples

VIDEO

OR EP 04 PHASES , SCOPE & LIMITATIONS OF OPERATION RESEARCH
Exploring Research Methodologies in the Social Sciences (4 Minutes)
Characteristics, Strengths, Weaknesses, and Kinds of Quantitative Research
Objective of business research/Advantages and disadvantages of business research
Limitations of statistics
Scope and Limitation of the Study: Steps, tips & example

COMMENTS

How to Write Limitations of the Study (with examples)
Common types of limitations and their ramifications include: Theoretical: limits the scope, depth, or applicability of a study. Methodological: limits the quality, quantity, or diversity of the data. Empirical: limits the representativeness, validity, or reliability of the data. Analytical: limits the accuracy, completeness, or significance of ...
Limitations in Research
Limitations in Research. Limitations in research refer to the factors that may affect the results, conclusions, and generalizability of a study.These limitations can arise from various sources, such as the design of the study, the sampling methods used, the measurement tools employed, and the limitations of the data analysis techniques.
Limitations of the Study
The limitations of the study are those characteristics of design or methodology that impacted or influenced the interpretation of the findings from your research. Study limitations are the constraints placed on the ability to generalize from the results, to further describe applications to practice, and/or related to the utility of findings ...
21 Research Limitations Examples (2024)
In research, studies can have limitations such as limited scope, researcher subjectivity, and lack of available research tools. Acknowledging the limitations of your study should be seen as a strength. It demonstrates your willingness for transparency, humility, and submission to the scientific method and can bolster the integrity of the study.
What are the limitations in research and how to write them?
The limitations in research are the constraints in design, methods or even researchers' limitations that affect and influence the interpretation of your research's ultimate findings. These are limitations on the generalization and usability of findings that emerge from the design of the research and/or the method employed to ensure validity ...
Limited by our limitations
Abstract. Study limitations represent weaknesses within a research design that may influence outcomes and conclusions of the research. Researchers have an obligation to the academic community to present complete and honest limitations of a presented study. Too often, authors use generic descriptions to describe study limitations.
Limitations of a Research Study
A strong regional focus. 3. Data or statistical limitations. In some cases, it is impossible to collect sufficient data for research or very difficult to get access to the data. This could lead to incomplete conclusion to your study. Moreover, this insufficiency in data could be the outcome of your study design.
Understanding Limitations in Research
Research process limitations. The study's design can impose constraints on the process. For example, as you're conducting the research, issues may arise that don't conform to the data collection methodology you developed. You may not realize until well into the process that you should have incorporated more specific questions or ...
PDF How to discuss your study's limitations effectively
"The study also had the limitations inherent to any retrospective study. However, given the extreme rarity of the disease, a prospective study of this population was infeasible." Providing a statement reiterating your study's particular strengths can remind reviewers of the value of the study's findings.
Research Limitations: A Comprehensive Guide
Embarking on a research journey is an exciting endeavor, but every study has its boundaries and constraints. Understanding and transparently acknowledging these limitations is a crucial aspect of scholarly work. In this guide, we'll explore the concept of research limitations, why they matter, and how to effectively address and navigate them in your academic endeavors.
How to Present the Limitations of the Study Examples
Step 1. Identify the limitation (s) of the study. This part should comprise around 10%-20% of your discussion of study limitations. The first step is to identify the particular limitation (s) that affected your study. There are many possible limitations of research that can affect your study, but you don't need to write a long review of all ...
Q: What are the limitations of a study and how to write them?
The limitations of a study are its flaws or shortcomings which could be the result of unavailability of resources, small sample size, flawed methodology, etc. ... Register for comprehensive research tips and expert advice on English writing, journal publishing, good publication practices, trends in publishing, and a lot more. More.
Stating the Obvious: Writing Assumptions, Limitations, and
Limitations of a dissertation are potential weaknesses in your study that are mostly out of your control, given limited funding, choice of research design, statistical model constraints, or other factors. In addition, a limitation is a restriction on your study that cannot be reasonably dismissed and can affect your design and results.
Research Limitations vs Research Delimitations
Research Limitations. Research limitations are, at the simplest level, the weaknesses of the study, based on factors that are often outside of your control as the researcher. These factors could include things like time, access to funding, equipment, data or participants.For example, if you weren't able to access a random sample of participants for your study and had to adopt a convenience ...
How to Identify Limitations in Research
Well, that depends entirely on the nature of your study. You'll need to comb through your research approach, methodology, testing processes, and expected results to identify the type of limitations your study may be exposed to. It's worth noting that this understanding can only offer a broad idea of the possible restrictions you'll face ...
Organizing Academic Research Papers: Limitations of the Study
Always acknowledge a study's limitations. It is far better for you to identify and acknowledge your study's limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor and be graded down because you appear to have ignored them. Keep in mind that acknowledgement of a study's limitations is an opportunity to make suggestions for further research.
How to Present the Limitations of a Study in Research?
Writing the limitations of the research papers is often assumed to require lots of effort. However, identifying the limitations of the study can help structure the research better. Therefore, do not underestimate the importance of research study limitations. 3. Opportunity to make suggestions for further research.
(PDF) Limited by our limitations
Abstract. Study limitations represent weaknesses within a research design that may influence outcomes and conclusions of the research. Researchers have an obligation to the academic community to ...
Research limitations: the need for honesty and common sense
Limitations generally fall into some common categories, and in a sense we can make a checklist for authors here. Price and Murnan ( 2004) gave an excellent and detailed summary of possible research limitations in their editorial for the American Journal of Health Education. They discussed limitations affecting internal and external validity ...
Limitations of the Study
Keep in mind that acknowledgement of a study's limitations is an opportunity to make suggestions for further research. ... Lack of prior research studies on the topic-- citing prior research studies forms the basis of your literature review and helps lay a foundation for understanding the research problem you are investigating. Depending on the ...
Limited by our limitations
Abstract. Study limitations represent weaknesses within a research design that may influence outcomes and conclusions of the research. Researchers have an obligation to the academic community to present complete and honest limitations of a presented study. Too often, authors use generic descriptions to describe study limitations.
(PDF) Limitations of Research
conference, or a published research paper in an academic journal. "Limitations of Research". is a section in the standard research report (the research report is usually divided into the ...
Research Limitations
Research limitations in a typical dissertation may relate to the following points: 1. Formulation of research aims and objectives. You might have formulated research aims and objectives too broadly. You can specify in which ways the formulation of research aims and objectives could be narrowed so that the level of focus of the study could be ...
Viral decisions: unmasking the impact of COVID-19 info and ...
Data and sampling. The research methodology outlines the strategy for achieving the study's objectives. This research adopted a quantitative approach, utilizing a survey method (questionnaire ...
Synthesis, docking study, and antitumor evaluation of benzamides and
Current chemotherapeutic agents have several limitations, including lack of selectivity, the development of undesirable side effects, and chemoresistance. As a result, there is an unmet need for the development of novel small molecules with minimal side effects and the ability to specifically target tumor cells.
Bad news: how the media reported on an observational study about
Medical research gets plenty of media attention. Unfortunately, the attention is often problematic, frequently failing to provide readers with information needed to understand findings or decide whether to believe them.1 Unless journalists highlight study cautions and limitations, avoid spin2 and overinterpretation of findings, the public may draw erroneous conclusions about the reliability ...
Older adults with diabetes experienced functional decline during the
The study also found that socioeconomic factors were associated with functional limitations among older adults with and without diabetes. When compared to those with an annual household income of ...
As Recommendations for Isolation End, How Common is Long COVID?
Research has shown lower employment rates among adults with long COVID and although there is still uncertainty about the magnitude of the effects, recent work suggests that the net reduction in ...
Parkinson's: Diabetes drug may reduce deterioration of motor skills
Truong said that the study's limitations warrant further research to establish several aspects of long-term treatment of Parkinson's with GLP-1 receptor agonists: dose optimization ...
81% of U.S. adults
Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand American adults' and teens' views on ways social media companies could limit minors' use of their platforms. This analysis uses data from two separate surveys, allowing us to compare the views of U.S. teens ages 13 to 17 with U.S. adults ages 18 and older.

How to Write Limitations of the Study (with examples)

What are limitations in research?

Why is identifying limitations important?

How to write limitations

Don’t hide your limitations

Writing limitations

Examples of common limitations

Methodology limitations

Research process limitations

Final thoughts

Ensure your structure and ideas are consistent and clearly communicated

Limitations in Research – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Limitations in Research

Types of Limitations in Research

Sample Size Limitations

Time Limitations

Selection Bias

Confounding Variables

Measurement Error

Ethical Limitations

Examples of Limitations in Research

How to Write Limitations in Research

Purpose of Limitations in Research

When to Write Limitations in Research

Importance of Limitations in Research

Advantages of Limitations in Research

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

Importance of...

Descriptions of Possible Limitations

Structure and Writing Style

Writing Tip

Another Writing Tip

Yet Another Writing Tip

21 Research Limitations Examples

Research Limitations Examples

Qualitative Research Limitations

1. Subjectivity

2. Researcher Bias

3. Generalizability

4. The Hawthorne Effect

5. Replicability

6. Limited Scope

7. Time Constraints

8. Resource Intensiveness

9. Coding Difficulties

10. Risk of Non-Responsiveness

11. Risk of Attrition

12. Difficulty in Maintaining Confidentiality and Anonymity

13. Difficulty in Finding Research Participants

14. Ethical Limitations

Quantitative Research Limitations

1. Over-Simplification

2. Lack of Context

3. Applicability to Real-World Settings

4. Limited Flexibility

5. Risk of Survey Error

6. Limited Ability to Probe Answers

7. Reliance on Instruments for Data Collection

8. Time and Resource Constraints (Specific to Quantitative Research)

How to Discuss Your Research Limitations

2. In the Conclusion Section or Chapter

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

What are the limitations in research and how to write them?

What are the limitations in research?

Why should include limitations of research in my paper?

Possible limitations examples

Methodological limitations

Lack of available or reliable data

Lack of prior research on the subject

The measure used to collect data

Issues with research samples and selection