scope of the study in research meaning

• Privacy Policy

Home » Scope of the Research – Writing Guide and Examples

Scope of the Research – Writing Guide and Examples

Table of Contents

Scope of the Research

Scope of research refers to the range of topics, areas, and subjects that a research project intends to cover. It is the extent and limitations of the study, defining what is included and excluded in the research.

The scope of a research project depends on various factors, such as the research questions , objectives , methodology, and available resources. It is essential to define the scope of the research project clearly to avoid confusion and ensure that the study addresses the intended research questions.

How to Write Scope of the Research

Writing the scope of the research involves identifying the specific boundaries and limitations of the study. Here are some steps you can follow to write a clear and concise scope of the research:

• Identify the research question: Start by identifying the specific question that you want to answer through your research . This will help you focus your research and define the scope more clearly.
• Define the objectives: Once you have identified the research question, define the objectives of your study. What specific goals do you want to achieve through your research?
• Determine the population and sample: Identify the population or group of people that you will be studying, as well as the sample size and selection criteria. This will help you narrow down the scope of your research and ensure that your findings are applicable to the intended audience.
• Identify the variables: Determine the variables that will be measured or analyzed in your research. This could include demographic variables, independent variables , dependent variables , or any other relevant factors.
• Define the timeframe: Determine the timeframe for your study, including the start and end date, as well as any specific time intervals that will be measured.
• Determine the geographical scope: If your research is location-specific, define the geographical scope of your study. This could include specific regions, cities, or neighborhoods that you will be focusing on.
• Outline the limitations: Finally, outline any limitations or constraints of your research, such as time, resources, or access to data. This will help readers understand the scope and applicability of your research findings.

Examples of the Scope of the Research

Some Examples of the Scope of the Research are as follows:

Title : “Investigating the impact of artificial intelligence on job automation in the IT industry”

Scope of Research:

This study aims to explore the impact of artificial intelligence on job automation in the IT industry. The research will involve a qualitative analysis of job postings, identifying tasks that can be automated using AI. The study will also assess the potential implications of job automation on the workforce, including job displacement, job creation, and changes in job requirements.

Title : “Developing a machine learning model for predicting cyberattacks on corporate networks”

This study will develop a machine learning model for predicting cyberattacks on corporate networks. The research will involve collecting and analyzing network traffic data, identifying patterns and trends that are indicative of cyberattacks. The study aims to build an accurate and reliable predictive model that can help organizations identify and prevent cyberattacks before they occur.

Title: “Assessing the usability of a mobile app for managing personal finances”

This study will assess the usability of a mobile app for managing personal finances. The research will involve conducting a usability test with a group of participants, evaluating the app’s ease of use, efficiency, and user satisfaction. The study aims to identify areas of the app that need improvement, and to provide recommendations for enhancing its usability and user experience.

Title : “Exploring the effects of mindfulness meditation on stress reduction among college students”

This study aims to investigate the impact of mindfulness meditation on reducing stress levels among college students. The research will involve a randomized controlled trial with two groups: a treatment group that receives mindfulness meditation training and a control group that receives no intervention. The study will examine changes in stress levels, as measured by self-report questionnaires, before and after the intervention.

Title: “Investigating the impact of social media on body image dissatisfaction among young adults”

This study will explore the relationship between social media use and body image dissatisfaction among young adults. The research will involve a cross-sectional survey of participants aged 18-25, assessing their social media use, body image perceptions, and self-esteem. The study aims to identify any correlations between social media use and body image dissatisfaction, and to determine if certain social media platforms or types of content are particularly harmful.

When to Write Scope of the Research

Here is a guide on When to Write the Scope of the Research:

• Before starting your research project, it’s important to clearly define the scope of your study. This will help you stay focused on your research question and avoid getting sidetracked by irrelevant information.
• The scope of the research should be determined by the research question or problem statement. It should outline what you intend to investigate and what you will not be investigating.
• The scope should also take into consideration any limitations of the study, such as time, resources, or access to data. This will help you realistically plan and execute your research.
• Writing the scope of the research early in the research process can also help you refine your research question and identify any gaps in the existing literature that your study can address.
• It’s important to revisit the scope of the research throughout the research process to ensure that you stay on track and make any necessary adjustments.
• The scope of the research should be clearly communicated in the research proposal or study protocol to ensure that all stakeholders are aware of the research objectives and limitations.
• The scope of the research should also be reflected in the research design, methods, and analysis plan. This will ensure that the research is conducted in a systematic and rigorous manner that is aligned with the research objectives.
• The scope of the research should be written in a clear and concise manner, using language that is accessible to all stakeholders, including those who may not be familiar with the research topic or methodology.
• When writing the scope of the research, it’s important to be transparent about any assumptions or biases that may influence the research findings. This will help ensure that the research is conducted in an ethical and responsible manner.
• The scope of the research should be reviewed and approved by the research supervisor, committee members, or other relevant stakeholders. This will ensure that the research is feasible, relevant, and contributes to the field of study.
• Finally, the scope of the research should be clearly stated in the research report or dissertation to provide context for the research findings and conclusions. This will help readers understand the significance of the research and its contribution to the field of study.

Purpose of Scope of the Research

Purposes of Scope of the Research are as follows:

• Defines the boundaries and extent of the study.
• Determines the specific objectives and research questions to be addressed.
• Provides direction and focus for the research.
• Helps to identify the relevant theories, concepts, and variables to be studied.
• Enables the researcher to select the appropriate research methodology and techniques.
• Allows for the allocation of resources (time, money, personnel) to the research.
• Establishes the criteria for the selection of the sample and data collection methods.
• Facilitates the interpretation and generalization of the results.
• Ensures the ethical considerations and constraints are addressed.
• Provides a framework for the presentation and dissemination of the research findings.

Advantages of Scope of the Research

Here are some advantages of having a well-defined scope of research:

• Provides clarity and focus: Defining the scope of research helps to provide clarity and focus to the study. This ensures that the research stays on track and does not deviate from its intended purpose.
• Helps to manage resources: Knowing the scope of research allows researchers to allocate resources effectively. This includes managing time, budget, and personnel required to conduct the study.
• Improves the quality of research: A well-defined scope of research helps to ensure that the study is designed to achieve specific objectives. This helps to improve the quality of the research by reducing the likelihood of errors or bias.
• Facilitates communication: A clear scope of research enables researchers to communicate the goals and objectives of the study to stakeholders, such as funding agencies or participants. This facilitates understanding and enhances cooperation.
• Enables replication : A well-defined scope of research makes it easier to replicate the study in the future. This allows other researchers to validate the findings and build upon them, leading to the advancement of knowledge in the field.
• Increases the relevance of research: Defining the scope of research helps to ensure that the study is relevant to the problem or issue being investigated. This increases the likelihood that the findings will be useful and applicable to real-world situations.
• Reduces the risk of scope creep : Scope creep occurs when the research expands beyond the original scope, leading to an increase in the time, cost, and resources required to complete the study. A clear definition of the scope of research helps to reduce the risk of scope creep by establishing boundaries and limitations.
• Enhances the credibility of research: A well-defined scope of research helps to enhance the credibility of the study by ensuring that it is designed to achieve specific objectives and answer specific research questions. This makes it easier for others to assess the validity and reliability of the study.
• Provides a framework for decision-making : A clear scope of research provides a framework for decision-making throughout the research process. This includes decisions related to data collection, analysis, and interpretation.

Scope of the Research Vs Scope of the Project

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Informed Consent in Research – Types, Templates...

Research Topics – Ideas and Examples

Data Analysis – Process, Methods and Types

Research Paper Title – Writing Guide and Example

Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing...

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and...

How to Determine the Scope of Research | Examples & Tips

Introduction

What is the scope of a study, what is a research scope example, what is the purpose of the research scope, what considerations are relevant to the research scope, how do i write the scope in a report.

The scope of a research project is one of the more important yet sometimes understated aspects of a study. The scope of the study explains what the researchers are examining and what environment they are studying.

This article explains the general purpose of the research scope, how it informs the broader study at hand, and how it can be incorporated in a research paper to establish the necessary transparency and rigor for your research audience.

Scientific knowledge very rarely, if ever, produces universal axioms. The boiling point of water changes depending on the amount of pressure in the air and, by extension, the altitude you are at relative to sea level when you boil water. What looks like polite behavior in a given culture may look rude in another. The definition of beauty is bound to change as people get older.

Similarly, research findings that aren't contextualized are less persuasive. If you are reading a study that looks at interactional patterns between parents and their children, it's important to have a clear sense of the theoretical lens , data collection , and analysis in order to determine the extent to which the findings are applicable across contexts.

In a nutshell, the scope tells you what the researchers are looking at and are not looking at. It provides the context necessary to understand the research, how it was conducted, and what findings it generated.

Conversely, establishing the bounds of the scope also clarify what research inquiries are not addressed in the study, ensuring that the study's argumentation is clearly grounded in the theory, data, and analysis.

Let's imagine an example of a research study examining best practices for mental health. The research design centers on a survey study with a target population of college students with part-time jobs in addition to their coursework.

The researchers can focus on any number of things affecting mental health, including lifestyle factors such as sleep, socioeconomic factors such as income, and even influences further afield like the political alignment of friends and family.

Certainly, any of these things can have a profound impact on one's mental health. But when there are so many things to examine, it's necessary to narrow down what the research project at hand should examine.

The scope of the study can come down to any number of things, including the researchers' interest, the current state of theoretical development on the subject of mental health, and the design of the study, particularly how the data is collected. It might even boil down to influences like geographical location, which can determine the kind of research participants involved in the study.

All of these factors can inform an explicit description of the scope, which might look like this if found in the methodology section of a paper:

"In this study, the researchers focused on surveying college students over four months, roughly the same time frame as a semester at a university in the United States. Surveys were distributed to all college students, but this paper will narrow the data analysis to those students who reported having part-time jobs. This refined lens aligns with our interest in examining work-related factors contributing to negative mental health outcomes, as established in previous studies."

The above example of a study's scope highlights what the researchers focused on during the study and while analyzing the data. The researchers chose to study a narrow subset of their data to generate insights most applicable to their research interests. The researchers might also analyze the proportion of students that reported having part-time jobs to give a broader description of the study body, but they clearly focus on understanding the mental health of students with part-time jobs.

Moreover, the narrow scope allows the researchers to focus on a small number of elements in the relationship between mental health and work, which allows the researchers to make deeper contributions to this specific part of the conversation around students' mental health.

Defining the scope of the study benefits both the researcher and their audience. Ultimately, establishing transparency in a research project focuses the data collection and analysis processes and makes the findings more compelling and persuasive.

Describing the scope can clarify what specific concepts should be used and examined during the course of the study. A good scope can keep the researcher focused on what data to collect and what ancillary developments, however interesting or useful, should be discarded or left to another study. Setting a clear scope can greatly help researchers maintain a coherent fit between their research question, collected data, and ultimate findings. Journal editors and reviewers often reject papers for publication because of a lack of fit between these important elements, which highlights the value of a clear research scope for conducting rigorous research.

In logistical terms, a well-defined scope also ensures the feasibility of a study by limiting the researcher's lens to a small but manageable set of factors to observe and analyze during the course of the study. Conversely, an unfocused study makes the collection of data a significant challenge when the researcher is left to document as much as possible, potentially gathering all kinds of data that may not be relevant to a given research question , while not gathering enough of the appropriate data that can address a research inquiry.

The research audience also requires an understanding of the scope of the study to determine the relevance of the findings to their own research inquiry. Readers of research bring their own assumptions and preconceived notions about what to look at in a given context. A well-written scope, on the other hand, gives readers clear guidance on what to look for in the study's analysis and findings.

From start to finish, make ATLAS.ti your research solution

Make the most of your qualitative data with ATLAS.ti. Get started by downloading a free trial.

Besides the research area being studied, the scope of a study has a clear description of most of the following aspects. Understanding what makes rigorous research and what readers of research look for in a well-crafted study will be useful for describing the scope of a research project.

Target population

The kind of research participants you are including in a study informs what theories are relevant and how the study should be designed. Are you researching children, young adults, or older professionals? Do they belong to a specific culture or community? Are they connected or related to each other in some way or do they just happen to belong to the same demographic?

Because qualitative, social science research seldom yields universal theories, it's important to narrow the scope of a study down to a specific set of the population. The more specific the scope, the more that the findings and resulting theoretical developments can be appropriately contextualized and thus inform how other researchers can build on those insights.

Geographical location

The geographical location covered by the study provides a necessary context for any study in the social sciences. Even if you narrow the targeted population to a specific demographic, what is true for that population in one country or region may not be true for another.

As a result, a scope that describes the location of the study explains where the findings are most relevant and where they might be relevant for further study.

Data collection

If you are conducting observational or ethnographic research , it may seem like you are facing a firehose when it comes to collecting data. Even interviews , focus groups , and surveys can provide a torrent of data, much of which may not be relevant to your inquiry if the study design isn't refined.

Without a sufficiently defined scope that identifies what aspects of the world you are looking at, the data you collect may become unmanageable at best. When crafting your study, develop the scope to determine the specific topics and aspects worth exploring.

In academic publishing , reviewers and editors need a clear understanding of the scope of the study in a manuscript when evaluating the research. Despite its importance, however, the scope doesn't necessarily have its own explicit section in a research paper.

That said, you can describe the study's scope in key areas of your research writing. Here are some of the important sections in a typical research paper for academic writing where a description of the scope is key.

Literature review

Any study disseminated for academic publishing requires a thorough understanding of the current research and existing theories that are relevant to your study. In turn, the literature review also defines the aspects of the phenomenon or concepts that you can study for the purpose of theoretical development.

Rely on the key theories in the literature review to define a useful scope that identifies key aspects of the theoretical framework that will inform the data collection and analysis .

Problem statement

A well-crafted problem statement generally sets the stage for what knowledge is missing and what novel and interesting insights can be uncovered in new research. As a result, a clear understanding of the research scope helps define the problem that a new research project seeks to address.

When incorporating a problem statement in your research paper, be sure to explicitly detail the rationale for problematizing the phenomenon you are researching.

Research question

Research questions define the relationships between the relevant concepts or phenomena being explored, and thus provide evidence of a scope that has been thoughtfully planned. Use the wording of your research question to highlight what is the central focus and, thus, the scope of the study.

At minimum, the scope of the study should narrow the focus of data collection and data analysis to the study of certain concepts relevant to addressing the given research question. Qualitative research methods can often result in open-ended data collection that can yield many insights, only a few of which may directly address the research inquiry.

Narrowing the collection of data to a set of relevant criteria can help the researcher avoid any unnecessary rabbit holes that might complicate the later analysis with irrelevant information.

Limitations

Research scope and limitations go hand in hand because, together, they define what is studied within a research project and what is not. Moreover, a good description of the study's scope can also provide direction, by way of the description of limitations, about what inquiries other researchers could pursue next.

Bring clarity to your research with ATLAS.ti

Turn data into insights with our powerful data analysis platform. Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti today.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

Decoding the Scope and Delimitations of the Study in Research

Scope and delimitations of the study are two essential elements of a research paper or thesis that help to contextualize and convey the focus and boundaries of a research study. This allows readers to understand the research focus and the kind of information to expect. For researchers, especially students and early career researchers, understanding the meaning and purpose of the scope and delimitation of a study is crucial to craft a well-defined and impactful research project. In this article, we delve into the core concepts of scope and delimitation in a study, providing insightful examples, and practical tips on how to effectively incorporate them into your research endeavors.

Table of Contents

What is scope and delimitation in research

The scope of a research paper explains the context and framework for the study, outlines the extent, variables, or dimensions that will be investigated, and provides details of the parameters within which the study is conducted. Delimitations in research , on the other hand, refer to the limitations imposed on the study. It identifies aspects of the topic that will not be covered in the research, conveys why these choices were made, and how this will affect the outcome of the research. By narrowing down the scope and defining delimitations, researchers can ensure focused research and avoid pitfalls, which ensures the study remains feasible and attainable.

Example of scope and delimitation of a study

A researcher might want to study the effects of regular physical exercise on the health of senior citizens. This would be the broad scope of the study, after which the researcher would refine the scope by excluding specific groups of senior citizens, perhaps based on their age, gender, geographical location, cultural influences, and sample sizes. These then, would form the delimitations of the study; in other words, elements that describe the boundaries of the research.

The purpose of scope and delimitation in a study

The purpose of scope and delimitation in a study is to establish clear boundaries and focus for the research. This allows researchers to avoid ambiguity, set achievable objectives, and manage their project efficiently, ultimately leading to more credible and meaningful findings in their study. The scope and delimitation of a study serve several important purposes, including:

• Establishing clarity: Clearly defining the scope and delimitation of a study helps researchers and readers alike understand the boundaries of the investigation and what to expect from it.
• Focus and relevance: By setting the scope, researchers can concentrate on specific research questions, preventing the study from becoming too broad or irrelevant.
• Feasibility: Delimitations of the study prevent researchers from taking on too unrealistic or unmanageable tasks, making the research more achievable.
• Avoiding ambiguity: A well-defined scope and delimitation of the study minimizes any confusion or misinterpretation regarding the research objectives and methods.

Given the importance of both the scope and delimitations of a study, it is imperative to ensure that they are mentioned early on in the research manuscript. Most experts agree that the scope of research should be mentioned as part of the introduction and the delimitations must be mentioned as part of the methods section. Now that we’ve covered the scope and delimitation meaning and purpose, we look at how to write each of these sections.

How to write the scope of the study in research

When writing the scope of the study, remain focused on what you hope to achieve. Broadening the scope too much might make it too generic while narrowing it down too much may affect the way it would be interpreted. Ensure the scope of the study is clear, concise and accurate. Conduct a thorough literature review to understand existing literature, which will help identify gaps and refine the scope of your study.

It is helpful if you structure the scope in a way that answers the Six Ws – questions whose answers are considered basic in information-gathering.

Why: State the purpose of the research by articulating the research objectives and questions you aim to address in your study.

What: Outline the specific topic to be studied, while mentioning the variables, concepts, or aspects central to your research; these will define the extent of your study.

Where: Provide the setting or geographical location where the research study will be conducted.

When : Mention the specific timeframe within which the research data will be collected.

Who : Specify the sample size for the study and the profile of the population they will be drawn from.

How : Explain the research methodology, research design, and tools and analysis techniques.

How to write the delimitations of a study in research

When writing the delimitations of the study, researchers must provide all the details clearly and precisely. Writing the delimitations of the study requires a systematic approach to narrow down the research’s focus and establish boundaries. Follow these steps to craft delimitations effectively:

• Clearly understand the research objectives and questions you intend to address in your study.
• Conduct a comprehensive literature review to identify gaps and areas that have already been extensively covered. This helps to avoid redundancies and home in on a unique issue.
• Clearly state what aspects, variables, or factors you will be excluding in your research; mention available alternatives, if any, and why these alternatives were rejected.
• Explain how you the delimitations were set, and they contribute to the feasibility and relevance of your study, and how they align with the research objectives.
• Be sure to acknowledge limitations in your research, such as constraints related to time, resources, or data availability.

Being transparent ensures credibility, while explaining why the delimitations of your study could not be overcome with standard research methods backed up by scientific evidence can help readers understand the context better.

Differentiating between delimitations and limitations

Most early career researchers get confused and often use these two terms interchangeably which is wrong. Delimitations of a study refer to the set boundaries and specific parameters within which the research is carried out. They help narrow down your focus and makes it more relevant to what you are trying to prove.

Meanwhile, limitations in a study refer to the validity and reliability of the research being conducted. They are those elements of your study that are usually out of your immediate control but are still able to affect your findings in some way. In other words, limitation are potential weaknesses of your research.

In conclusion, scope and delimitation of a study are vital elements that shape the trajectory of your research study. The above explanations will have hopefully helped you better understand the scope and delimitations meaning, purpose, and importance in crafting focused, feasible, and impactful research studies. Be sure to follow the simple techniques to write the scope and delimitations of the study to embark on your research journey with clarity and confidence. Happy researching!

Editage All Access is a subscription-based platform that unifies the best AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline every step of a researcher’s journey. The Editage All Access Pack is a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI writing assistant, literature recommender, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional publication services from Editage.  

Based on 22+ years of experience in academia, Editage All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $14 a month !    

Related Posts

What are the Best Research Funding Sources

Inductive vs. Deductive Research Approach

Scope and Delimitations in Research

Delimitations are the boundaries that the researcher sets in a research study, deciding what to include and what to exclude. They help to narrow down the study and make it more manageable and relevant to the research goal.

Updated on October 19, 2022

All scientific research has boundaries, whether or not the authors clearly explain them. Your study's scope and delimitations are the sections where you define the broader parameters and boundaries of your research.

The scope details what your study will explore, such as the target population, extent, or study duration. Delimitations are factors and variables not included in the study.

Scope and delimitations are not methodological shortcomings; they're always under your control. Discussing these is essential because doing so shows that your project is manageable and scientifically sound.

This article covers:

• What's meant by “scope” and “delimitations”
• Why these are integral components of every study
• How and where to actually write about scope and delimitations in your manuscript
• Examples of scope and delimitations from published studies

What is the scope in a research paper?

Simply put, the scope is the domain of your research. It describes the extent to which the research question will be explored in your study.

Articulating your study's scope early on helps you make your research question focused and realistic.

It also helps decide what data you need to collect (and, therefore, what data collection tools you need to design). Getting this right is vital for both academic articles and funding applications.

What are delimitations in a research paper?

Delimitations are those factors or aspects of the research area that you'll exclude from your research. The scope and delimitations of the study are intimately linked.

Essentially, delimitations form a more detailed and narrowed-down formulation of the scope in terms of exclusion. The delimitations explain what was (intentionally) not considered within the given piece of research.

Scope and delimitations examples

Use the following examples provided by our expert PhD editors as a reference when coming up with your own scope and delimitations.

Scope example

Your research question is, “What is the impact of bullying on the mental health of adolescents?” This topic, on its own, doesn't say much about what's being investigated.

The scope, for example, could encompass:

• Variables: “bullying” (dependent variable), “mental health” (independent variable), and ways of defining or measuring them
• Bullying type: Both face-to-face and cyberbullying
• Target population: Adolescents aged 12–17
• Geographical coverage: France or only one specific town in France

Delimitations example

Look back at the previous example.

Exploring the adverse effects of bullying on adolescents' mental health is a preliminary delimitation. This one was chosen from among many possible research questions (e.g., the impact of bullying on suicide rates, or children or adults).

Delimiting factors could include:

• Research design : Mixed-methods research, including thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews and statistical analysis of a survey
• Timeframe : Data collection to run for 3 months
• Population size : 100 survey participants; 15 interviewees
• Recruitment of participants : Quota sampling (aiming for specific portions of men, women, ethnic minority students etc.)

We can see that every choice you make in planning and conducting your research inevitably excludes other possible options.

What's the difference between limitations and delimitations?

Delimitations and limitations are entirely different, although they often get mixed up. These are the main differences:

This chart explains the difference between delimitations and limitations. Delimitations are the boundaries of the study while the limitations are the characteristics of the research design or methodology.

Delimitations encompass the elements outside of the boundaries you've set and depends on your decision of what yo include and exclude. On the flip side, limitations are the elements outside of your control, such as:

• limited financial resources
• unplanned work or expenses
• unexpected events (for example, the COVID-19 pandemic)
• time constraints
• lack of technology/instruments
• unavailable evidence or previous research on the topic

Delimitations involve narrowing your study to make it more manageable and relevant to what you're trying to prove. Limitations influence the validity and reliability of your research findings. Limitations are seen as potential weaknesses in your research.

Example of the differences

To clarify these differences, go back to the limitations of the earlier example.

Limitations could comprise:

• Sample size : Not large enough to provide generalizable conclusions.
• Sampling approach : Non-probability sampling has increased bias risk. For instance, the researchers might not manage to capture the experiences of ethnic minority students.
• Methodological pitfalls : Research participants from an urban area (Paris) are likely to be more advantaged than students in rural areas. A study exploring the latter's experiences will probably yield very different findings.

Where do you write the scope and delimitations, and why?

It can be surprisingly empowering to realize you're restricted when conducting scholarly research. But this realization also makes writing up your research easier to grasp and makes it easier to see its limits and the expectations placed on it. Properly revealing this information serves your field and the greater scientific community.

Openly (but briefly) acknowledge the scope and delimitations of your study early on. The Abstract and Introduction sections are good places to set the parameters of your paper.

Next, discuss the scope and delimitations in greater detail in the Methods section. You'll need to do this to justify your methodological approach and data collection instruments, as well as analyses

At this point, spell out why these delimitations were set. What alternative options did you consider? Why did you reject alternatives? What could your study not address?

Let's say you're gathering data that can be derived from different but related experiments. You must convince the reader that the one you selected best suits your research question.

Finally, a solid paper will return to the scope and delimitations in the Findings or Discussion section. Doing so helps readers contextualize and interpret findings because the study's scope and methods influence the results.

For instance, agricultural field experiments carried out under irrigated conditions yield different results from experiments carried out without irrigation.

Being transparent about the scope and any outstanding issues increases your research's credibility and objectivity. It helps other researchers replicate your study and advance scientific understanding of the same topic (e.g., by adopting a different approach).

How do you write the scope and delimitations?

Define the scope and delimitations of your study before collecting data. This is critical. This step should be part of your research project planning.

Answering the following questions will help you address your scope and delimitations clearly and convincingly.

• What are your study's aims and objectives?
• Why did you carry out the study?
• What was the exact topic under investigation?
• Which factors and variables were included? And state why specific variables were omitted from the research scope.
• Who or what did the study explore? What was the target population?
• What was the study's location (geographical area) or setting (e.g., laboratory)?
• What was the timeframe within which you collected your data ?
• Consider a study exploring the differences between identical twins who were raised together versus identical twins who weren't. The data collection might span 5, 10, or more years.
• A study exploring a new immigration policy will cover the period since the policy came into effect and the present moment.
• How was the research conducted (research design)?
• Experimental research, qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research, literature review, etc.
• What data collection tools and analysis techniques were used? e.g., If you chose quantitative methods, which statistical analysis techniques and software did you use?
• What did you find?
• What did you conclude?

Useful vocabulary for scope and delimitations

When explaining both the scope and delimitations, it's important to use the proper language to clearly state each.

For the scope , use the following language:

• This study focuses on/considers/investigates/covers the following:
• This study aims to . . . / Here, we aim to show . . . / In this study, we . . .
• The overall objective of the research is . . . / Our objective is to . . .

When stating the delimitations, use the following language:

• This [ . . . ] will not be the focus, for it has been frequently and exhaustively discusses in earlier studies.
• To review the [ . . . ] is a task that lies outside the scope of this study.
• The following [ . . . ] has been excluded from this study . . .
• This study does not provide a complete literature review of [ . . . ]. Instead, it draws on selected pertinent studies [ . . . ]

Analysis of a published scope

In one example, Simione and Gnagnarella (2020) compared the psychological and behavioral impact of COVID-19 on Italy's health workers and general population.

Here's a breakdown of the study's scope into smaller chunks and discussion of what works and why.

Also notable is that this study's delimitations include references to:

• Recruitment of participants: Convenience sampling
• Demographic characteristics of study participants: Age, sex, etc.
• Measurements methods: E.g., the death anxiety scale of the Existential Concerns Questionnaire (ECQ; van Bruggen et al., 2017) etc.
• Data analysis tool: The statistical software R

Analysis of published scope and delimitations

Scope of the study : Johnsson et al. (2019) explored the effect of in-hospital physiotherapy on postoperative physical capacity, physical activity, and lung function in patients who underwent lung cancer surgery.

The delimitations narrowed down the scope as follows:

Refine your scope, delimitations, and scientific English

English ability shouldn't limit how clear and impactful your research can be. Expert AJE editors are available to assess your science and polish your academic writing. See AJE services here .

The AJE Team

See our "Privacy Policy"

How to Write the Scope of Research: A Comprehensive Guide [Plus Examples]

Learn how to write a clear and effective scope of research. This guide covers key elements, step-by-step instructions, and examples to improve your research writing.

Glice Martineau

Jul 29, 2024

Image by Freepik

The scope of research is a crucial element in any  academic study , defining the boundaries and focus of your investigation, which is crucial for the scope of the study. This article will guide you through the process of writing a well-defined scope, ensuring your research paper is manageable, impactful, and achievable.

If you're embarking on your first academic writing journey, understanding how to craft an effective scope will make your research easier and more focused.

Understanding the Purpose of Research Scope

The scope of a study explains the extent to which the research area will be explored in the work and specifies the parameters within which the study will be operating, guided by the scope of a research design.

It's essential to define the scope of research early in the process, as it helps to guide the research design:

1. Clarify research boundaries: By setting clear limits, you ensure that your study remains focused and doesn't veer off into tangential areas.

2. Focus on specific research objectives : A well-defined scope helps you concentrate on the most relevant aspects of the research, making it easier to address your research questions effectively.

3. Scope of study considerations. Ensure feasibility of the study: By considering the scope and delimitations, you can evaluate whether your research project is manageable within the given timeframe and resources.

Image by drobotdean on Freepik

Key Elements of a Research Scope

When writing the scope of your study, consider including the following elements:

1. Research problem : Clearly state the central issue your study aims to address. 2. Research questions: Formulate specific questions that your study will answer. 3. Study limitations: Acknowledge any constraints or potential Biases relevant to the research study that might affect your research. 4. Target population: Define the group of individuals or entities your research will focus on. 5. Timeframe: Specify the duration of your study and any relevant time-based parameters. 6. Geographical boundaries: If applicable, indicate the geographical location(s) involved in the study.

Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Research Scope

1. identify your research problem.

Start by narrowing down your broad research area to a specific problem. This helps define the purpose of your study and guides the rest of your scope.

For example, instead of studying "The effects of social media," you might explore "The impact of Instagram usage on body image among young adults aged 18-24 in the United States."

2. Formulate Clear Research Questions

Develop focused research questions that directly relate to your research problem.

These questions should be specific, measurable, and achievable within your study's constraints.

For instance:

• "How does daily Instagram usage correlate with body satisfaction scores among young adults?"
• "What specific Instagram features are most strongly associated with negative body image perceptions?"

3. Define Study Limitations

Acknowledge the boundaries and limitations of your research, understanding how they shape the scope of your research study. This might include methodological constraints , sample size restrictions, or potential biases .

Be transparent about what your study excludes and why.

For example, you might state that your study focuses solely on Instagram and doesn't explore other social media platforms.

4. Specify the Target Population

Clearly define the group you'll be studying. Consider factors such as age range, geographical location, and any specific characteristics relevant to your research.

For instance: "This study will focus on young adults aged 18-24, residing in urban areas of the United States, who use Instagram daily."

5. Establish a Realistic Timeframe

Determine the duration of your study and any time-based parameters for data collection. This helps in planning your research methodology and ensures the project is manageable.

For example: "This study will be conducted over a six-month period, with data collection occurring during the first three months."

6. Set Geographical Boundaries

If your research is location-specific, clearly state the geographical scope.

This could be as broad as a country or as specific as a particular city or institution.

Examples of Well-Written Research Scopes

Research scope in social sciences: .

"This study explores the impact of Instagram usage on body image among young adults aged 18-24 in New York City. The research will focus on daily users of the platform and examine correlations between usage patterns and body satisfaction scores. The study will be conducted over a six-month period, using a mixed-methods approach including surveys and in-depth interviews. While the study acknowledges the broader context of social media influence, it will not explore other platforms or age groups."

Research Scope in Medical Research: 

"This research project aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a new cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) approach in treating anxiety disorders among adults aged 30-50. The study will be conducted in three major hospitals in Chicago over a 12-month period. While the study will assess various anxiety disorders, it will exclude patients with comorbid depression. The research methodology will involve randomized controlled trials with a sample size of 200 participants."

Common Pitfalls to Avoid When Writing a Research Scope

1. Overly broad or narrow scopes: Strive for a balance that allows for meaningful exploration without becoming unmanageable. 2. Ambiguous language: Use clear, specific terms to define your scope and delimitations. 3. Unrealistic expectations: Consider the feasibility of your research within the given timeframe and resources.

Writing a well-defined scope of research is crucial for the success of your academic research or research paper. It helps you curate a focused, manageable, and impactful study by clearly outlining the boundaries within which your research will operate.

By following the steps outlined in this guide and learning from the examples provided, you can craft a scope that sets your research up for success.

Remember, the scope of a study explains the extent of your exploration and makes it easier for both you and your readers to understand the parameters of your work. 

As you progress in your research process, don't hesitate to revisit and refine your scope to ensure it remains aligned with your research objectives and methodology.

Easily pronounces technical words in any field

Scope of Research

Academic Writing

Research Paper

Recent articles

What is an Individualized Education Plan (IEP)?

Aug 1, 2024

Individualized Education Plan

Special Education

IEP Process

Learning Disabilities

Assistive Technology

Noam Chomsky's Theory of Language Acquisition

Aug 5, 2024

What are the Responsibilities of a Cosigner in a Student Loan?

Aug 6, 2024

Financial Aid

College Funding

Cosigner Responsibilities

Student Loans

10 Best Productivity Books

Aug 13, 2024

Productivity Books

Time Management

Efficiency Tips

Self Improvement

Goal Setting

Community Blog

Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.

Scope and Delimitations – Explained & Example

• By DiscoverPhDs
• October 2, 2020

What Is Scope and Delimitation in Research?

The scope and delimitations of a thesis, dissertation or research paper define the topic and boundaries of the research problem to be investigated.

The scope details how in-depth your study is to explore the research question and the parameters in which it will operate in relation to the population and timeframe.

The delimitations of a study are the factors and variables not to be included in the investigation. In other words, they are the boundaries the researcher sets in terms of study duration, population size and type of participants, etc.

Difference Between Delimitations and Limitations

Delimitations refer to the boundaries of the research study, based on the researcher’s decision of what to include and what to exclude. They narrow your study to make it more manageable and relevant to what you are trying to prove.

Limitations relate to the validity and reliability of the study. They are characteristics of the research design or methodology that are out of your control but influence your research findings. Because of this, they determine the internal and external validity of your study and are considered potential weaknesses.

In other words, limitations are what the researcher cannot do (elements outside of their control) and delimitations are what the researcher will not do (elements outside of the boundaries they have set). Both are important because they help to put the research findings into context, and although they explain how the study is limited, they increase the credibility and validity of a research project.

Guidelines on How to Write a Scope

A good scope statement will answer the following six questions:

• Why – the general aims and objectives (purpose) of the research.
• What – the subject to be investigated, and the included variables.
• Where – the location or setting of the study, i.e. where the data will be gathered and to which entity the data will belong.
• When – the timeframe within which the data is to be collected.
• Who – the subject matter of the study and the population from which they will be selected. This population needs to be large enough to be able to make generalisations.
• How – how the research is to be conducted, including a description of the research design (e.g. whether it is experimental research, qualitative research or a case study), methodology, research tools and analysis techniques.

To make things as clear as possible, you should also state why specific variables were omitted from the research scope, and whether this was because it was a delimitation or a limitation. You should also explain why they could not be overcome with standard research methods backed up by scientific evidence.

How to Start Writing Your Study Scope

Use the below prompts as an effective way to start writing your scope:

• This study is to focus on…
• This study covers the…
• This study aims to…

Guidelines on How to Write Delimitations

Since the delimitation parameters are within the researcher’s control, readers need to know why they were set, what alternative options were available, and why these alternatives were rejected. For example, if you are collecting data that can be derived from three different but similar experiments, the reader needs to understand how and why you decided to select the one you have.

Your reasons should always be linked back to your research question, as all delimitations should result from trying to make your study more relevant to your scope. Therefore, the scope and delimitations are usually considered together when writing a paper.

How to Start Writing Your Study Delimitations

Use the below prompts as an effective way to start writing your study delimitations:

• This study does not cover…
• This study is limited to…
• The following has been excluded from this study…

Examples of Delimitation in Research

Examples of delimitations include:

• research objectives,
• research questions,
• research variables,
• target populations,
• statistical analysis techniques .

Examples of Limitations in Research

Examples of limitations include:

• Issues with sample and selection,
• Insufficient sample size, population traits or specific participants for statistical significance,
• Lack of previous research studies on the topic which has allowed for further analysis,
• Limitations in the technology/instruments used to collect your data,
• Limited financial resources and/or funding constraints.

This post gives you the best questions to ask at a PhD interview, to help you work out if your potential supervisor and lab is a good fit for you.

You’ll come across many academics with PhD, some using the title of Doctor and others using Professor. This blog post helps you understand the differences.

Find out the differences between a Literature Review and an Annotated Bibliography, whey they should be used and how to write them.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Browse PhDs Now

Starting your PhD can feel like a daunting, exciting and special time. They’ll be so much to think about – here are a few tips to help you get started.

The term research instrument refers to any tool that you may use to collect, measure and analyse research data.

Dr Benzi gained his PhD in Data Science from the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne in 2016. He is now a professional data artist and head of research at a tech company in Paris, as well as a trained public speaker.

Dr Dillon gained her PhD in Molecular Cancer Studies at the University of Manchester in 2015. She now works at a biotech company called HairClone, optimising treatments for androgenic alopecia.

Join Thousands of Students

Academic Research in Education: Scope of Research

• How to Find Books, Articles and eBooks
• Books, eBooks, & Multimedia
• Evaluating Information
• Deciding on a Topic
• Creating a Thesis Statement
• The Literature Review
• Scope of Research

Defining the Scope of your Project

What is scope.

• Choosing a Design
• Citing Sources & Avoiding Plagiarism
• Contact Library

Post-Grad Collective [PGC]. (2017, February 13). Thesis Writing-Narrow the Scope   [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlCO5yRB9No&feature=youtu.be

Learn to cite a YouTube Video! 

The scope of your project sets clear parameters for your research. 

A scope statement will give basic information about the depth and breadth of the project. It tells your reader exactly what you want to find out , how you will conduct your study, the reports and deliverables  that will be part of the outcome of the study, and the responsibilities of the researchers involved in the study. The extent of the scope will be a part of acknowledging any biases in the research project. 

Defining the scope of a project: 

• focuses your research goals
• clarifies the expectations for your research project
•  helps you determine potential biases in your research methodology by acknowledging the limits of your research study 
• identifies the limitations of your research 
• << Previous: The Literature Review
• Next: Choosing a Design >>
• Last Updated: Aug 22, 2024 12:46 PM
• URL: https://moc.libguides.com/aca_res_edu

Faculty & Staff Directory

Event Calendar

News Archives

Privacy Policy

Terms & Conditions

Public Relations

634 Henderson St.

Mount Olive, NC 28365

1-800-653-0854

[email protected]

How to Write the Scope of the Study

June 12, 2023

2023   ·   PHD     ·   Blog  

Source: https://www.discoverphds.com/blog/scope-of-the-study

The scope of the study is defined at the start of the research project before data collection begins. It is used by researchers to set the boundaries and limitations within which the study will be performed.

What is the Scope of the Study?

The scope of the study refers to the boundaries within which your research project will be performed; this is sometimes also called the scope of research. To define the scope of the study is to define all aspects that will be considered in your research project. It is also just as important to make clear what aspects will not be covered; i.e. what is outside of the scope of the study.

Why is the Scope of the Study Important?

The scope of the study is always considered and agreed upon in the early stages of the project, before any data collection or experimental work has started. This is important because it focuses the work of the proposed study down to what is practically achievable within a given timeframe.

A well-defined research or study scope enables a researcher to give clarity to the study outcomes that are to be investigated. It makes clear why specific data points have been collected whilst others have been excluded.

Without this, it is difficult to define an end point for a research project since no limits have been defined on the work that could take place. Similarly, it can also make the approach to answering a research question too open ended.

How do you Write the Scope of the Study?

In order to write the scope of the study that you plan to perform, you must be clear on the research parameters that you will and won’t consider. These parameters usually consist of the sample size, the duration, inclusion and exclusion criteria, the methodology and any geographical or monetary constraints.

Each of these parameters will have limits placed on them so that the study can practically be performed, and the results interpreted relative to the limitations that have been defined. These parameters will also help to shape the direction of each research question you consider.

The term limitations’ is often used together with the scope of the study to describe the constraints of any parameters that are considered and also to clarify which parameters have not been considered at all. Make sure you get the balance right here between not making the scope too broad and unachievable, and it not being too restrictive, resulting in a lack of useful data.

The sample size is a commonly used parameter in the definition of the research scope. For example, a research project involving human participants may define at the start of the study that 100 participants will be recruited. This number will be determined based on an understanding of the difficulty in recruiting participants to studies and an agreement of an acceptable period of time in which to recruit this number.

Any results that are obtained by the research group can then be interpreted by others with the knowledge that the study was capped to 100 participants and an acceptance of this as a limitation of the study. In other words, it is acknowledged that recruiting 100 rather than 1,000 participants has limited the amount of data that could be collected, however this is an acceptable limitation due to the known difficulties in recruiting so many participants (e.g. the significant period of time it would take and the costs associated with this).

Example of a Scope of the Study

The follow is a (hypothetical) example of the definition of the scope of the study, with the research question investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health .

Whilst the immediate negative health problems related to the COVID-19 pandemic have been well documented, the impact of the virus on the mental health (MH) of young adults (age 18-24 years) is poorly understood. The aim of this study is to report on MH changes in population group due to the pandemic.

The scope of the study is limited to recruiting 100 volunteers between the ages of 18 and 24 who will be contacted using their university email accounts. This recruitment period will last for a maximum of 2 months and will end when either 100 volunteers have been recruited or 2 months have passed. Each volunteer to the study will be asked to complete a short questionnaire in order to evaluate any changes in their MH.

From this example we can immediately see that the scope of the study has placed a constraint on the sample size to be used and/or the time frame for recruitment of volunteers. It has also introduced a limitation by only opening recruitment to people that have university emails; i.e. anyone that does not attend university will be excluded from this study.

This may be an important factor when interpreting the results of this study; the comparison of MH during the pandemic between those that do and do not attend university, is therefore outside the scope of the study here. We are also told that the methodology used to assess any changes in MH are via a questionnaire. This is a clear definition of how the outcome measure will be investigated and any other methods are not within the scope of research and their exclusion may be a limitation of the study.

The scope of the study is important to define as it enables a researcher to focus their research to within achievable parameters.

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
• Implement Sci

Scoping studies: advancing the methodology

Danielle levac.

1 School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, 1400 Main Street West, Room 403, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Heather Colquhoun

Kelly k o'brien.

2 Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Scoping studies are an increasingly popular approach to reviewing health research evidence. In 2005, Arksey and O'Malley published the first methodological framework for conducting scoping studies. While this framework provides an excellent foundation for scoping study methodology, further clarifying and enhancing this framework will help support the consistency with which authors undertake and report scoping studies and may encourage researchers and clinicians to engage in this process.

We build upon our experiences conducting three scoping studies using the Arksey and O'Malley methodology to propose recommendations that clarify and enhance each stage of the framework. Recommendations include: clarifying and linking the purpose and research question (stage one); balancing feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping process (stage two); using an iterative team approach to selecting studies (stage three) and extracting data (stage four); incorporating a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis, reporting results, and considering the implications of study findings to policy, practice, or research (stage five); and incorporating consultation with stakeholders as a required knowledge translation component of scoping study methodology (stage six). Lastly, we propose additional considerations for scoping study methodology in order to support the advancement, application and relevance of scoping studies in health research.

Specific recommendations to clarify and enhance this methodology are outlined for each stage of the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Continued debate and development about scoping study methodology will help to maximize the usefulness and rigor of scoping study findings within healthcare research and practice.

Scoping studies (or scoping reviews) represent an increasingly popular approach to reviewing health research evidence [ 1 ]. However, no universal scoping study definition or purpose exists (Table ​ (Table1) 1 ) [ 1 , 2 ]. Definitions commonly refer to 'mapping,' a process of summarizing a range of evidence in order to convey the breadth and depth of a field. Scoping studies differ from systematic reviews because authors do not typically assess the quality of included studies [ 3 - 5 ]. Scoping studies also differ from narrative or literature reviews in that the scoping process requires analytical reinterpretation of the literature [ 1 ].

Definitions and purposes of scoping studies

Researchers can undertake a scoping study to examine the extent, range, and nature of research activity, determine the value of undertaking a full systematic review, summarize and disseminate research findings, or identify gaps in the existing literature [ 6 ]. As such, researchers can use scoping studies to clarify a complex concept and refine subsequent research inquiries [ 1 ]. Scoping studies may be particularly relevant to disciplines with emerging evidence, such as rehabilitation science, in which the paucity of randomized controlled trials makes it difficult for researchers to undertake systematic reviews. In these situations, scoping studies are ideal because researchers can incorporate a range of study designs in both published and grey literature, address questions beyond those related to intervention effectiveness, and generate findings that can complement the findings of clinical trials.

In an effort to provide guidance to authors undertaking scoping studies, Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] developed a six-stage methodological framework: identifying the research question, searching for relevant studies, selecting studies, charting the data, collating, summarizing, and reporting the results, and consulting with stakeholders to inform or validate study findings (Table ​ (Table2). 2 ). While this framework provided an excellent methodological foundation, published scoping studies continue to lack sufficient methodological description or detail about the data analysis process, making it challenging for readers to understand how study findings were determined [ 1 ]. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] encouraged other authors to refine their framework in order to enhance the methodology.

Overview of the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework for conducting a scoping study

In this paper, we apply our experiences using the Arksey and O'Malley framework to build on the existing methodological framework. Specifically, we propose recommendations for each stage of the framework, followed by considerations for the advancement, application, and relevance of scoping studies in health research. Continual refinement of the framework stages may provide greater clarity about scoping study methodology, encourage researchers and clinicians to engage in this process, and help to enhance the methodological rigor with which authors undertake and report scoping studies [ 1 ].

We each completed a scoping study in separate areas of rehabilitation using the Arksey and O'Malley framework [ 6 ]. Goals of these studies included: identifying research priorities within HIV and rehabilitation [ 7 ], applying motor learning strategies within pediatric physical and occupational therapy intervention approaches [ 8 ], and exploring the use of theory within studies of knowledge translation [ 9 ]. The amount of literature reviewed in our studies ranged from 31 (DL) to 146 (KO) publications. Upon discovering that we had similar challenges implementing the scoping study methodology, we decided to use our experiences to further develop the existing framework. We conducted an informal literature search on scoping study methodology. We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, ERIC, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases using the search terms 'scoping,' 'scoping study,' 'scoping review,' and 'scoping methodology' for papers published in English between January 1990 and May 2010. Reference lists of pertinent papers were also searched. This search yielded seven citations that reflected on scoping study methodology, which were reviewed by one author (DL). After independently considering our own experiences utilizing the Arskey and O'Malley [ 6 ] framework, we met on seven occasions to discuss the challenges and develop recommendations for each stage of the methodological framework.

Recommendations to enhance scoping study methodology

We outline the challenges and recommendations associated with each stage of the methodological framework (Table ​ (Table3 3 ).

Summary of challenges and recommendations for scoping studies

Framework stage one: Identifying the research question

Scoping study research questions are broad in nature as the focus is on summarizing breadth of evidence. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] acknowledge the need to maintain a broad scope to research questions, however we found our research questions lacked the direction, clarity, and focus needed to inform subsequent stages of the research process, such as identifying studies and making decisions about study inclusion. To clarify this stage, we recommend that researchers combine a broad research question with a clearly articulated scope of inquiry. This includes defining the concept, target population, and health outcomes of interest to clarify the focus of the scoping study and establish an effective search strategy. For example, in one author's (KO) scoping study, the research question was broadly 'what is known about HIV and rehabilitation?' Defining the concept of 'rehabilitation' was essential in order to establish a clear scope to the study, guide the search strategy, and establish parameters around study selection in subsequent stages of the process [ 7 ].

Although Arskey and O'Malley [ 6 ] outline four main purposes for undertaking a scoping study, they do not articulate that purpose be specified within a specific framework stage. We recommend researchers simultaneously consider the purpose of the scoping study when articulating the research question. Linking a clear purpose for undertaking a scoping study to a well-defined research question at the first stage of the framework will help to provide a clear rationale for completing the study and facilitate decision making about study selection and data extraction later in the methodological process. A helpful strategy may be to envision the content and format of the intended outcome that may assist researchers to clearly determine the purpose at the beginning of a study. In the abovementioned HIV study, authors linked the broadly stated research question with a more specific purpose 'to identify the key research priorities in HIV and rehabilitation to advance policy and practice for people living with HIV in Canada' [ 7 ]. The envisioned outcome was a thematic framework that represented strengths and opportunities in HIV rehabilitation research, followed by a list of the key research priorities to pursue in future work.

Finally, the purposes put forth by Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] require more debate. We concur with Anderson et al. [ 2 ] and Davis et al. [ 1 ], who state that researchers may benefit from further clarification of the purposes for undertaking a scoping study. The first purpose, as articulated by Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ], is to summarize the extent, range, and nature of research activity; however, researchers are not required to reflect on their underlying motivation for doing so. We recommend that researchers consider the rationale for why they should summarize the activity in a field and the implications that this will have on research, practice, or policy. The second purpose is to assess the need for a full systematic review. However, it is difficult to determine whether a systematic review is advantageous when a scoping study does not involve methodological quality assessment of included studies. Furthermore, it is unclear how this purpose differs from existing methods of determining feasibility for a systematic review. The third purpose is to summarize and disseminate research findings, but we question how this differs from other narrative or systematic literature reviews. Lastly, the fourth purpose of undertaking a scoping study -- to identify gaps in the existing literature -- may yield false conclusions about the nature and extent of those gaps if the quality of the evidence is not assessed. The purpose 'to identify the key research priorities in HIV and rehabilitation to advance policy and practice for people living with HIV in Canada' does not explicitly align with one of the four Arskey and O'Malley purposes [ 7 ]. However, it appears authors inherently first summarized the extent, range, and nature of research (purpose one) and identified gaps in the existing literature (purpose four) in order to subsequently identify the key research priorities in HIV and rehabilitation (author purpose). This suggests authors might have an overall study purpose with multiple objectives articulated by Arksey and O'Malley that are required in order to help achieve their overall purpose.

Framework stage two: Identifying relevant studies

A strength of scoping studies includes the breadth and depth, or comprehensiveness, of evidence covered in a given field [ 1 ]. However, practical issues related to time, funding, and access to resources often require researchers to consider the balance between feasibility, breadth, and comprehensiveness. Brien et al. [ 5 ] reported that their search strategy yielded a vast amount of literature, making it difficult to determine how in depth to carry out the information synthesis. Although Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] identify these concerns and provide some suggestions to support these decisions, we also struggled with the trade-off between breadth and comprehensiveness and feasibility in our scoping studies. As such, we recommend that researchers ensure decisions surrounding feasibility do not compromise their ability to answer the research question or achieve the study purpose. Second, we recommend that a scoping study team be assembled whose members provide the methodological and context expertise needed for decisions regarding breadth and comprehensiveness. When limiting scope is unavoidable, researchers should justify their decisions and acknowledge the potential limitations of their study.

Framework stage three: Study selection

Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] provide suggestions to manage the time-consuming process of determining which studies to include in a scoping study. We experienced this stage as more iterative and requiring additional steps than implied in the original framework. While Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] do not indicate a team approach is imperative, we agree with others and suggest scoping studies involve multidisciplinary teams using a transparent and replicable process [ 2 , 10 ]. In two of our studies (HC and DL) where decision making was primarily completed by a single author, we faced several challenges, including uncertainty about which studies to include, variables to extract on the data-charting form, and the nature and extent of detail to conduct the data extraction process. This raised questions related to rigor and led to our recommendations for undertaking a systematic team approach to conducting a scoping study.

Specifically, we recommend that the team meet to discuss decisions surrounding study inclusion and exclusion at the beginning of the scoping process. Refining the search strategy based on abstracts retrieved from the search and reviewing full articles for study inclusion is also a critical step. We recommend that at least two researchers each independently review abstracts yielded from the search strategy for study selection. Reviewers should meet at the beginning, midpoint, and final stages of the abstract review process to discuss any challenges or uncertainties related to study selection and to go back and refine the search strategy if needed. This can help to alleviate potential ambiguity with a broad research question and to ensure that abstracts selected are relevant for full article review. Next, two reviewers should independently review the full articles for inclusion. When disagreements occur, a third reviewer can be consulted to determine final inclusion.

Framework stage four: Charting the data

This stage involves extracting data from included studies. Based on our experiences, we were uncertain about the nature and extent of information to extract from the included studies. To clarify this stage, we recommend that the research team collectively develop the data-charting form to determine which variables to extract that will help to answer the research question. Secondly, we recommend that charting be considered an iterative process in which researchers continually update the data-charting form. This is particularly true for process-oriented data, such as understanding how a theory or model has been used within a study. Uncertainty about the nature and extent of data that should be extracted may be resolved by researchers beginning the charting process and becoming familiar with study data, and then meeting again to refine the form. We recommend an additional step to charting the data in which two researchers independently extract data from the first five to ten studies using the data-charting form and meet to determine whether their approach to data extraction is consistent with the research question and purpose. Researchers may review one study several times within this stage. The number of researchers involved in the data extraction process will likely depend upon the number of included studies. For example, in one study, authors had difficulty developing one data-charting form that could apply to all included studies representing a range study designs, reviews, reports, and commentaries [ 7 ]. As a preliminary step, authors decided to classify the included studies into three areas --HIV disability, interventions, and roles of rehabilitation professionals in HIV care -- to help determine the nature and extent of information to extract from each of the types of studies [ 7 ].

Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] refer to a 'descriptive analytical method' that involves summarizing process information, such as the use of a theory or model in a meaningful format. Our experiences indicated that this is a highly valuable, though challenging aspect of scoping studies, as we struggled to chart and summarize complex concepts in a meaningful way. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] indicate that synthesis of material is critical as scoping studies are not a short summary of many articles. We agree, and feel that additional direction in the framework might help to navigate this crucial but challenging stage. Perhaps synthesizing process information may benefit from utilization of qualitative content analysis approaches to make sense of the wealth of extracted data [ 11 ]. This issue also highlights the overlap with the next analytical stage. The role and relevance of analyzing process data and using qualitative content analysis within scoping study methodology requires further discussion.

Framework stage five: Collating, summarizing, and reporting the results

Stage five is the most extensive in the scoping process, yet it lacks detail in the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Scoping studies have been criticized for rarely providing methodological detail about how results were achieved [ 1 ]. We appreciate the importance of breaking the analysis phase into meaningful and systematic steps so that researchers can provide this undertake scoping studies and report on findings in a rigorous manner. As a result, we recommend three distinct steps in framework stage five to increase the consistency with which researchers undertake and report scoping study methodology: analyzing the data, reporting results, and applying meaning to the results. As described in the existing framework, analysis (otherwise referred to as collating and summarizing) should involve a descriptive numerical summary and a thematic analysis. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] describe the need to provide a descriptive numerical summary, stating that researchers should describe the characteristics of included studies, such as the overall number of studies included, types of study design, years of publication, types of interventions, characteristics of the study populations, and countries where studies were conducted. However, the description of thematic analysis requires additional detail to assist authors in understanding and completing this step. In our experience, this analytical stage resembled qualitative data analytical techniques, and researchers may consider using qualitative content analytical techniques [ 10 ] and qualitative software to facilitate this process.

Second, when reporting results, we recommend that researchers consider the best approach to stating the outcome or end product of the study and how the scoping study findings will be articulated to readers ( e.g ., through themes, a framework, or a table of strengths and gaps in the evidence). This product should be tied to the purpose of the scoping study as recommended in framework stage one.

Finally, in order to advance the legitimacy of scoping study methodology, we must consider the implications of findings within the broader context. As a result, we recommend that researchers consider the meaning of their scoping study results and the broader implications for research, policy, and practice. For example, for the question 'how are motor-learning strategies used within contemporary physical and occupational therapy intervention approaches for children with neuromotor conditions?,' the author (DL) presented themes that described strategy use. Results yielded insights into how researchers should better describe interventions in their publications and provided further considerations for clinicians to make informed decisions about which therapeutic approach might best fit their clients' needs. Considering the overall implications of the results as an explicit framework stage will help to ensure that scoping study results have practical implications for future clinical practice, research, and policy. This recommendation leads to the final stage of the framework.

Optional stage six: Consultation

Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] suggest that consultation is an optional stage in conducting a scoping study. Although only one of our three scoping studies incorporated this stage, we argue that it adds methodological rigor and should be considered a required component. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] suggest that the purposes of consulting with stakeholders are to offer additional sources of information, perspectives, meaning, and applicability to the scoping study. However, it is unclear when, how, and why to consult with stakeholders, and how to analyze and integrate these data with the findings. We recommend researchers clearly establish a purpose for the consultation, which may include sharing preliminary findings with stakeholders, validating the findings, or informing future research. We suggest researchers use preliminary findings from stage five (either in the form of a framework, themes, or list of findings) as a foundation from which to inform the consultation. This will enable stakeholders to build on the evidence and offer a higher level of meaning, content expertise, and perspective to the preliminary findings. We also recommend that researchers clearly articulate the type of stakeholders with whom they wish to consult, how they will collect the data ( e.g ., focus groups, interviews, surveys), and how these data will be analyzed, reported, and integrated within the overall study outcome.

Finally, given that consultation requires researchers to orient stakeholders on the scoping study purpose, research question, preliminary findings, and plans for dissemination, we recommend that this stage additionally be considered a knowledge transfer mechanism. This may address Brien et al .'s [ 5 ] concern about the usefulness of scoping studies for stakeholders and how to translate knowledge about scoping studies. Given the importance of knowledge transfer and exchange in the uptake of research evidence [ 12 , 13 ], the consultation stage can be used to specifically translate the preliminary scoping study findings and develop effective dissemination strategies with stakeholders in the field, offering additional value to a scoping study.

One scoping study included a consultation phase comprised of focus groups and interviews with 28 stakeholders including people living with HIV, researchers, educators, clinicians, and policy makers [ 7 ]. Authors shared preliminary findings from the literature review phase of the scoping study with stakeholders and asked whether they may be able to identify any additional emerging issues related to HIV and rehabilitation not yet published in the evidence. The team proceeded to conduct a second consultation with 17 new and returning stakeholders whereby the team presented a preliminary framework of HIV and rehabilitation research and stakeholders refined the framework to further identify six key research priorities on HIV and rehabilitation. This series of consultations engaged community members in the development of the study outcome and provided opportunities for knowledge transfer about HIV and rehabilitation research. This process offered an ideal mechanism to enhance the validity of the study outcome while translating findings with the community. Nevertheless, further development of steps for undertaking knowledge translation as a part of the scoping study framework is required.

Additional considerations for scoping studies to support the advancement, application, and relevance of scoping studies in health research

Scoping study terminology.

Discrepancies in nomenclature between 'scoping reviews,' 'scoping studies,' 'scoping literature reviews,' and 'scoping exercises' lead to confusion. Despite our collective use of the Arksey and O'Malley framework, two authors (DL, HC) titled their studies as 'scoping reviews' while the other used 'scoping study.' In this paper, we use 'scoping studies' for consistency with Arksey and O'Malley's original framework. Nevertheless, the potential differences (if any) among the terms merit clarification. Lack of a universal definition for scoping studies is also problematic to researchers trying to clearly articulate their reasons for undertaking a scoping study. Finally, we advocate for labeling the methodology as the 'Arksey and O'Malley framework' to provide consistency for future use.

Quality assessment

Another consideration for scoping study methodology is the potential need to assess included studies for methodological quality. Brien et al. [ 5 ] state that this lack of quality assessment makes the results of scoping studies more challenging to interpret. Grant and Booth [ 4 ] imply that a lack of quality assessment limits the uptake of scoping study findings into policy and practice. While our research questions did not directly relate to any quality assessment debate, we recognize the challenges in assessing quality among the vast range of published and grey literature that may be included in scoping studies. This also raises the question of whether and how evidence from stakeholder consultation is evaluated in the scoping study process. It remains unclear whether the lack of quality assessment impacts the uptake and relevance of scoping study findings.

A final consideration for legitimization of scoping study methodology includes the development of a critical appraisal tool for scoping study quality [ 5 ]. Anderson et al. [ 2 ] offer criteria for assessing the value and utility of a commissioned scoping study in health policy contexts, but these criteria are not necessarily applicable to scoping studies in other areas of health research. Developing a critical appraisal tool would require the elements of a methodologically rigorous scoping study to be defined. This could include, but would not be limited to, the minimum level of analysis required and the requirements for reporting results. Overall, the issues surrounding quality assessment of included studies and subsequent scoping studies require further discussion.

Limitations

This paper responds to Arksey and O'Malley's [ 6 ] request for feedback to their proposed methodological framework. However, the recommendations that we propose are derived from our subjective experiences undertaking scoping studies of varying sizes in the rehabilitation field, and we recognize that they may not represent the opinions of all scoping study authors. Other than our individual experiences with our own studies, we have not yet implemented the full framework recommendations. Hence, readers can determine how strongly to interpret and implement these recommendations in their scoping study research. We invite others to trial our recommendations and continue the process of refining and improving this methodology.

Scoping studies present an increasingly popular option for synthesizing health evidence. Brien et al. [ 5 ] argue that guidelines are required to facilitate scoping review reporting and transparency. In this paper, we build on the existing methodological framework for scoping studies outlined by Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] and provide recommendations to clarify and enhance each stage, which may increase the consistency with which researchers undertake and report scoping studies. Recommendations include: clarifying and linking the purpose and research question; balancing feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping process; using an iterative team approach to selecting studies and extracting data; incorporating a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis; identifying the implications of the study findings for policy, practice, or research; and adopting consultation as a required component of scoping study methodology. Ongoing considerations include: establishing a common accepted definition and purpose(s) of scoping studies; defining methodological rigor for the assessment of scoping study quality; debating the need for quality assessment of included studies; and formalizing knowledge translation as a required element of scoping methodology. Continued debate and development about scoping study methodology will help to maximize the usefulness of scoping study findings within healthcare research and practice.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

DL and HC conceived of this paper. DL undertook the literature review process. DL, HC and KO developed challenges and recommendations. All authors drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors' information

DL is a physical therapist and doctoral candidate in the School of Rehabilitation Science at McMaster University. HC is an occupational therapist and doctoral candidate in the School of Rehabilitation Science at McMaster University. KO is a clinical epidemiologist, physical therapist, and postdoctoral fellow in the School of Rehabilitation Science at McMaster University. She is also a Lecturer in the Department of Physical Therapy at the University of Toronto.

Acknowledgements

DL is supported by a Doctoral Award from the Canadian Child Health Clinician Scientist Program, a strategic training initiative of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and the McMaster Child Health Research Institute. HC is supported by a Doctoral Award from the CIHR, the CIHR Quality of Life Strategic Training Program in Rehabilitation Research and the Canadian Occupational Therapy Foundation. KO is supported by a Fellowship from the CIHR, HIV/AIDS Research Program and a Michael DeGroote Postdoctoral Fellowship (McMaster University). The authors acknowledge the helpful feedback of Dr. Cheryl Missiuna on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

• Davis K, Drey N, Gould D. What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009; 46 :1386–1400. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.02.010. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson S, Allen P, Peckham S, Goodwin N. Asking the right questions: scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services. Health Res Policy Sys. 2008; 6 :7. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-6-7. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rumrill P, Fitzgerald S, Merchant W. Using scoping literature reviews as a means of understanding and interpreting existing literature. Work. 2010; 35 :399–404. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grant M, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J. 2009; 26 :91–108. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brien S, Lorenzetti D, Lewis S, Kennedy J, Ghali W. Overview of a formal scoping review on health system report cards. Implement Sci. 2010; 5 :2. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-2. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: Towards a Methodological Framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005; 8 :19–32. doi: 10.1080/1364557032000119616. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O'Brien K, Wilkins A, Zack E, Solomon P. Scoping the field: identifying key research priorities in HIV and rehabilitation. AIDS Behav. 2010; 14 :448–458. doi: 10.1007/s10461-009-9528-z. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Levac D, Wishart L, Missiuna C, Wright V. The application of motor learning strategies within functionally based interventions for children with neuromotor conditions. Peds Phys Ther. 2009; 21 :345–355. doi: 10.1097/PEP.0b013e3181beb09d. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Colquhoun H, Letts L, Law M, MacDermid J, Missiuna C. A scoping review of the use of theory in studies of knowledge translation. Can J Occup Ther. in press . [ PubMed ]
• Ehrich K, Freeman G, Richards S, Robinson I, Shepperd S. How to do a scoping exercise: continuity of care. Res Pol Plan. 2002; 20 :25–29. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005; 15 :1277–1288. doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, Robinson N. Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006; 26 :13–24. doi: 10.1002/chp.47. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schuster M, McGlynn E, Brook R. How good is the quality of healthcare in the United States? Milbank Q. 2005; 83 :843–895. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00403.x. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mays N, Roberts E, Popay J. In: Studying the organization and delivery of health services: research methods. Fulop N, Allen P, Clarke A, Black N, editor. London: Routledge; 2001. Synthesising research evidence; p. 194. [ Google Scholar ]
• Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Knowledge Translation. http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29418.html

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• Research Objectives | Definition & Examples

Research Objectives | Definition & Examples

Published on July 12, 2022 by Eoghan Ryan . Revised on November 20, 2023.

Research objectives describe what your research is trying to achieve and explain why you are pursuing it. They summarize the approach and purpose of your project and help to focus your research.

Your objectives should appear in the introduction of your research paper , at the end of your problem statement . They should:

• Establish the scope and depth of your project
• Contribute to your research design
• Indicate how your project will contribute to existing knowledge

Table of contents

What is a research objective, why are research objectives important, how to write research aims and objectives, smart research objectives, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research objectives.

Research objectives describe what your research project intends to accomplish. They should guide every step of the research process , including how you collect data , build your argument , and develop your conclusions .

Your research objectives may evolve slightly as your research progresses, but they should always line up with the research carried out and the actual content of your paper.

Research aims

A distinction is often made between research objectives and research aims.

A research aim typically refers to a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear at the end of your problem statement, before your research objectives.

Your research objectives are more specific than your research aim and indicate the particular focus and approach of your project. Though you will only have one research aim, you will likely have several research objectives.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Research objectives are important because they:

• Establish the scope and depth of your project: This helps you avoid unnecessary research. It also means that your research methods and conclusions can easily be evaluated .
• Contribute to your research design: When you know what your objectives are, you have a clearer idea of what methods are most appropriate for your research.
• Indicate how your project will contribute to extant research: They allow you to display your knowledge of up-to-date research, employ or build on current research methods, and attempt to contribute to recent debates.

Once you’ve established a research problem you want to address, you need to decide how you will address it. This is where your research aim and objectives come in.

Step 1: Decide on a general aim

Your research aim should reflect your research problem and should be relatively broad.

Step 2: Decide on specific objectives

Break down your aim into a limited number of steps that will help you resolve your research problem. What specific aspects of the problem do you want to examine or understand?

Step 3: Formulate your aims and objectives

Once you’ve established your research aim and objectives, you need to explain them clearly and concisely to the reader.

You’ll lay out your aims and objectives at the end of your problem statement, which appears in your introduction. Frame them as clear declarative statements, and use appropriate verbs to accurately characterize the work that you will carry out.

The acronym “SMART” is commonly used in relation to research objectives. It states that your objectives should be:

• Specific: Make sure your objectives aren’t overly vague. Your research needs to be clearly defined in order to get useful results.
• Measurable: Know how you’ll measure whether your objectives have been achieved.
• Achievable: Your objectives may be challenging, but they should be feasible. Make sure that relevant groundwork has been done on your topic or that relevant primary or secondary sources exist. Also ensure that you have access to relevant research facilities (labs, library resources , research databases , etc.).
• Relevant: Make sure that they directly address the research problem you want to work on and that they contribute to the current state of research in your field.
• Time-based: Set clear deadlines for objectives to ensure that the project stays on track.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

Research objectives describe what you intend your research project to accomplish.

They summarize the approach and purpose of the project and help to focus your research.

Your objectives should appear in the introduction of your research paper , at the end of your problem statement .

Your research objectives indicate how you’ll try to address your research problem and should be specific:

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

Scope of research is determined at the beginning of your research process , prior to the data collection stage. Sometimes called “scope of study,” your scope delineates what will and will not be covered in your project. It helps you focus your work and your time, ensuring that you’ll be able to achieve your goals and outcomes.

Defining a scope can be very useful in any research project, from a research proposal to a thesis or dissertation . A scope is needed for all types of research: quantitative , qualitative , and mixed methods .

To define your scope of research, consider the following:

• Budget constraints or any specifics of grant funding
• Your proposed timeline and duration
• Specifics about your population of study, your proposed sample size , and the research methodology you’ll pursue
• Any inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Any anticipated control , extraneous , or confounding variables that could bias your research if not accounted for properly.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Ryan, E. (2023, November 20). Research Objectives | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 27, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-objectives/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Setting Limits and Focusing Your Study: Exploring scope and delimitation

As a researcher, it can be easy to get lost in the vast expanse of information and data available. Thus, when starting a research project, one of the most important things to consider is the scope and delimitation of the study. Setting limits and focusing your study is essential to ensure that the research project is manageable, relevant, and able to produce useful results. In this article, we will explore the importance of setting limits and focusing your study through an in-depth analysis of scope and delimitation.

Company Name 123

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, cu usu cibo vituperata, id ius probo maiestatis inciderint, sit eu vide volutpat.

Sign Up for More Insights

Table of Contents

Scope and Delimitation – Definition and difference

Scope refers to the range of the research project and the study limitations set in place to define the boundaries of the project and delimitation refers to the specific aspects of the research project that the study will focus on.

In simpler words, scope is the breadth of your study, while delimitation is the depth of your study.

Scope and delimitation are both essential components of a research project, and they are often confused with one another. The scope defines the parameters of the study, while delimitation sets the boundaries within those parameters. The scope and delimitation of a study are usually established early on in the research process and guide the rest of the project.

Types of Scope and Delimitation

Significance of Scope and Delimitation

Setting limits and focusing your study through scope and delimitation is crucial for the following reasons:

• It allows researchers to define the research project’s boundaries, enabling them to focus on specific aspects of the project. This focus makes it easier to gather relevant data and avoid unnecessary information that might complicate the study’s results.
• Setting limits and focusing your study through scope and delimitation enables the researcher to stay within the parameters of the project’s resources.
• A well-defined scope and delimitation ensure that the research project can be completed within the available resources, such as time and budget, while still achieving the project’s objectives.

5 Steps to Setting Limits and Defining the Scope and Delimitation of Your Study

There are a few steps that you can take to set limits and focus your study.

1. Identify your research question or topic

The first step is to identify what you are interested in learning about. The research question should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART). Once you have a research question or topic, you can start to narrow your focus.

2. Consider the key terms or concepts related to your topic

What are the important terms or concepts that you need to understand in order to answer your research question? Consider all available resources, such as time, budget, and data availability, when setting scope and delimitation.

The scope and delimitation should be established within the parameters of the available resources. Once you have identified the key terms or concepts, you can start to develop a glossary or list of definitions.

3. Consider the different perspectives on your topic

There are often different perspectives on any given topic. Get feedback on the proposed scope and delimitation. Advisors can provide guidance on the feasibility of the study and offer suggestions for improvement.

It is important to consider all of the different perspectives in order to get a well-rounded understanding of your topic.

4. Narrow your focus

Be specific and concise when setting scope and delimitation. The parameters of the study should be clearly defined to avoid ambiguity and ensure that the study is focused on relevant aspects of the research question.

This means deciding which aspects of your topic you will focus on and which aspects you will eliminate.

5. Develop the final research plan

Revisit and revise the scope and delimitation as needed. As the research project progresses, the scope and delimitation may need to be adjusted to ensure that the study remains focused on the research question and can produce useful results. This plan should include your research goals, methods, and timeline.

Examples of Scope and Delimitation

To better understand scope and delimitation, let us consider two examples of research questions and how scope and delimitation would apply to them.

Research question: What are the effects of social media on mental health?

Scope: The scope of the study will focus on the impact of social media on the mental health of young adults aged 18-24 in the United States.

Delimitation: The study will specifically examine the following aspects of social media: frequency of use, types of social media platforms used, and the impact of social media on self-esteem and body image.

Research question: What are the factors that influence employee job satisfaction in the healthcare industry?

Scope: The scope of the study will focus on employee job satisfaction in the healthcare industry in the United States.

Delimitation: The study will specifically examine the following factors that influence employee job satisfaction: salary, work-life balance, job security, and opportunities for career growth.

Setting limits and defining the scope and delimitation of a research study is essential to conducting effective research. By doing so, researchers can ensure that their study is focused, manageable, and feasible within the given time frame and resources. It can also help to identify areas that require further study, providing a foundation for future research.

So, the next time you embark on a research project, don’t forget to set clear limits and define the scope and delimitation of your study. It may seem like a tedious task, but it can ultimately lead to more meaningful and impactful research. And if you still can’t find a solution, reach out to Enago Academy using #AskEnago and tag @EnagoAcademy on Twitter , Facebook , and Quora .

Frequently Asked Questions

The scope in research refers to the boundaries and extent of a study, defining its specific objectives, target population, variables, methods, and limitations, which helps researchers focus and provide a clear understanding of what will be investigated.

Delimitation in research defines the specific boundaries and limitations of a study, such as geographical, temporal, or conceptual constraints, outlining what will be excluded or not within the scope of investigation, providing clarity and ensuring the study remains focused and manageable.

To write a scope; 1. Clearly define research objectives. 2. Identify specific research questions. 3. Determine the target population for the study. 4. Outline the variables to be investigated. 5. Establish limitations and constraints. 6. Set boundaries and extent of the investigation. 7. Ensure focus, clarity, and manageability. 8. Provide context for the research project.

To write delimitations; 1. Identify geographical boundaries or constraints. 2. Define the specific time period or timeframe of the study. 3. Specify the sample size or selection criteria. 4. Clarify any demographic limitations (e.g., age, gender, occupation). 5. Address any limitations related to data collection methods. 6. Consider limitations regarding the availability of resources or data. 7. Exclude specific variables or factors from the scope of the study. 8. Clearly state any conceptual boundaries or theoretical frameworks. 9. Acknowledge any potential biases or constraints in the research design. 10. Ensure that the delimitations provide a clear focus and scope for the study.

What is an example of delimitation of the study?

Thank you 💕

Thank You very simplified🩷

Thanks, I find this article very helpful

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Publishing Research

10 Tips to Prevent Research Papers From Being Retracted

Research paper retractions represent a critical event in the scientific community. When a published article…

• Industry News

Google Releases 2024 Scholar Metrics, Evaluates Impact of Scholarly Articles

Google has released its 2024 Scholar Metrics, assessing scholarly articles from 2019 to 2023. This…

Ensuring Academic Integrity and Transparency in Academic Research: A comprehensive checklist for researchers

Academic integrity is the foundation upon which the credibility and value of scientific findings are…

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

Improving Research Manuscripts Using AI-Powered Insights: Enago reports for effective research communication

Language Quality Importance in Academia AI in Evaluating Language Quality Enago Language Reports Live Demo…

• Reporting Research

How to Optimize Your Research Process: A step-by-step guide

For researchers across disciplines, the path to uncovering novel findings and insights is often filled…

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Demystifying the Role of Confounding Variables in Research

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.

• AI in Academia
• Promoting Research
• Career Corner
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer Review Week 2024
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

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

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

What Is Scope And Limitation In Research?

• Post author By admin
• April 16, 2024

Research is the cornerstone of progress in any field, be it science, social sciences, or humanities. But behind every research endeavor lies a crucial aspect that often goes unnoticed by many: the scope and limitation. In this blog, we’ll delve into what is scope and limitation in research, why they matter, and how they influence the outcome of a study.

Table of Contents

What Are The Main 10 Stages Of Research Process?

The research process typically involves several stages, each crucial for the successful completion of a study. Here are the main 10 stages of the research process:

• Identifying the Research Problem: This stage involves identifying a topic or issue that warrants investigation. Researchers should ensure the problem is significant, relevant, and feasible for study.
• Reviewing the Literature: Conducting a thorough review of existing literature on the chosen topic is essential. This helps researchers figure out what we already know, spot where there are holes in our knowledge, and make their research questions clearer.
• Formulating Research Questions or Hypotheses: Based on the identified research problem and literature review, researchers develop specific research questions or hypotheses that they aim to address through their study.
• Designing the Research Methodology: This stage involves selecting the appropriate research design, methods, and techniques for data collection and analysis. Researchers must consider factors such as the research objectives, the nature of the data, and ethical considerations.
• Sampling: Researchers need to determine the sampling strategy and select participants or samples that represent the population of interest. Sampling methods may vary depending on the research design and objectives.
• Data Collection: This stage involves collecting data using the chosen methods and techniques. Data collection may involve surveys, interviews, observations, experiments, or analysis of existing data, among other methods.
• Data Analysis: After collecting data, researchers look at it carefully using the right tools to figure out what it means. They want to find important ideas, check if their guesses are right, and answer the questions they’re studying.
• Interpreting Results: Researchers analyze the results of their data to understand how they relate to the questions or guesses they had at the beginning of their study. They assess the significance of the results, identify patterns or trends, and draw conclusions.
• Drawing Conclusions and Implications: Based on the interpretation of results, researchers draw conclusions regarding the research questions or hypotheses. They discuss the implications of their findings, their relevance to theory or practice, and any recommendations for future research or applications.
• Writing and Presenting the Research Report: Finally, researchers write a comprehensive research report detailing the entire research process, from problem identification to conclusions. The report typically includes an introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion. Researchers may also present their findings at conferences or publish them in academic journals.

Scope in Research

• Definition: The scope of research outlines the boundaries and extent of the study.
• Components: It includes various elements such as research objectives, questions, methodology, timeframe, and geographic coverage.
• Guiding Factor: Scope guides researchers in determining what aspects of the topic will be included in the study and what will be excluded.
• Clarity: Defining the scope ensures clarity and focus, preventing researchers from straying off-topic.
• Relevance: It helps in ensuring that the research addresses pertinent issues and contributes meaningfully to the existing body of knowledge.

Limitation in Research

• Definition: Limitations refer to constraints or weaknesses within the research study that may impact its validity or generalizability.
• Types: Limitations can arise due to various factors such as methodological constraints, resource limitations, scope constraints, ethical considerations, and time constraints.
• Acknowledgement: Researchers should openly acknowledge limitations to maintain transparency and credibility.
• Mitigation: While some limitations may be unavoidable, researchers can mitigate their impact through careful planning, rigorous methodology, and transparent reporting.
• Future Implications: Identifying and addressing limitations can provide valuable insights for future research, guiding researchers in overcoming similar challenges in subsequent studies.

What Is Scope And Limitation In Research Example?

Scope in research example.

Let’s consider a research study investigating the impact of social media usage on teenagers’ mental health in urban areas of a particular city over the past three years. The scope of this study would include:

• Research Goals: We want to understand how using social media affects how teenagers feel.
• Research Questions: How much do teenagers in cities use social media, and for how long? Does using social media relate to how teenagers feel, like if they feel sad or anxious?
• Research Methodology: Utilizing surveys and interviews to gather data on social media usage patterns and mental health indicators.
• Timeframe: The study will focus on data collected over the past three years to capture recent trends and changes.
• Geographic Coverage: The study will concentrate on urban areas within a specific city, ensuring relevance and context specificity.

Limitation in Research Example

In the same study, limitations may arise due to various factors:

• Methodological Limitation: The reliance on self-reported data from surveys and interviews may introduce response bias and inaccuracies.
• Resource Limitation: Limited funding and time constraints may restrict the sample size and the depth of data collection, potentially affecting the study’s comprehensiveness.
• Scope Limitation: Focusing solely on urban areas may limit the generalizability of the findings to rural or suburban populations.
• Ethical Limitation: Ensuring informed consent and protecting the privacy of participants may pose ethical challenges, especially when dealing with sensitive topics like mental health.
• Time Limitation: The study’s timeframe of three years may not capture long-term effects or trends in social media usage and mental health outcomes.

In this example, the scope defines the parameters and objectives of the study, while the limitations highlight potential constraints and challenges that may impact the research process and findings.

How Do You Write Scope And Limitations In Research?

Writing the scope and limitations section in a research paper involves clearly defining the parameters of your study and acknowledging any constraints or weaknesses that may impact its validity or generalizability. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to write the scope and limitations in research:

• Begin with the Scope
• Start by defining the scope of your research. This involves outlining the boundaries and extent of your study.
• Clearly state the objectives of your research and the specific aspects you will investigate.
• Identify the research questions or hypotheses that you aim to address.
• Describe the methodology you will use, including data collection and analysis techniques.
• Specify the timeframe and geographic coverage of your study.
• Be Concise and Specific
• Avoid ambiguity by being concise and specific in your description of the scope. Clearly define what will be included in your study and what will be excluded.
• Use clear and precise language to convey the scope of your research to your readers.
• Acknowledge Limitations
• After defining the scope, acknowledge any limitations or constraints that may impact your study.
• Identify potential methodological limitations, such as sample size, data collection methods, or measurement tools.
• Consider resource limitations, including funding, time, and access to data or participants.
• Discuss any scope limitations, such as geographic or demographic restrictions.
• Address ethical considerations and any potential biases or confounding factors.
• Provide Justification
• Explain why these limitations are relevant to your study and how they may affect the interpretation of your results.
• Justify your choices and decisions regarding the scope and limitations of your research.
• Demonstrate awareness of potential challenges and demonstrate transparency in your reporting.
• Offer Recommendations
• Despite limitations, suggest ways to mitigate their impact or address them in future research.
• Provide recommendations for researchers who may encounter similar constraints in their own studies.
• Highlight the implications of your research findings in light of the acknowledged limitations.
• Review and Revise
• Review your scope and limitations section to ensure clarity, coherence, and accuracy.
• Revise as needed to ensure that your description accurately reflects the parameters of your study and acknowledges any potential constraints.

In conclusion (of what is scope and limitation in research), scope and limitation are integral components of any research project. Understanding the scope helps researchers define the boundaries and parameters of their study, while acknowledging limitations ensures transparency and credibility.

By carefully considering scope and limitation, researchers can conduct more rigorous and meaningful studies that contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their respective fields.

• australia (2)
• duolingo (13)
• Education (284)
• General (78)
• How To (18)
• IELTS (127)
• Latest Updates (162)
• Malta Visa (6)
• Permanent residency (1)
• Programming (31)
• Scholarship (1)
• Sponsored (4)
• Study Abroad (187)
• Technology (12)
• work permit (8)

Recent Posts

• Translators
• Graphic Designers

Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.

Exploring Scope and Delimitation in Academic Research

Academic research is a meticulous process that requires precise planning and clear boundaries. Two pivotal components in this process are the scope and delimitations of the study. The definitions and establishment of these parameters are instrumental in ensuring that the research is effective, manageable, and yields relevant results.

The "scope" of a research project refers to the areas that the study will cover. It is the breadth and depth of the investigation. It defines the subject matter, the geographical location, the time frame, and the issues that the study will explore. Essentially, the scope delineates what the researcher aims to cover in the study.

On the other hand, "delimitations" are the boundaries or limitations set by the researcher. They define what the study will not include. Delimitations could involve the choice of research methodology , the selection of respondents, the duration of the study, and more. They help in confining the study to a manageable size while excluding peripheral elements.

Understanding and correctly implementing scope and delimitations are vital to ensuring your research is well-defined and focused, facilitating higher accuracy and relevancy in your findings.

Importance of scope in research

"Scope" in research refers to the comprehensive extent of study—it outlines the parameters of what will be explored and addressed. It defines the topic of the research , the geographical region under study, the timeframe considered, and the issues that the study will address. The scope of a research project is vital because it determines the depth and breadth of your investigation.

Defining the scope of research is a fundamental step in the research process for several reasons. First, it provides a roadmap for the study, giving the researcher clear guidelines about what to include and exclude. Without a well-defined scope, research can become unmanageably vast or lose its focus.

Second, the scope ensures the research's relevance and applicability. It helps the researcher maintain a tight focus on the study's central question , ensuring that all aspects of the research contribute to answering this question. This focus aids in avoiding irrelevant diversions that could dilute the final conclusions.

Finally, a well-defined scope can help ensure the efficient use of resources. Research involves considerable time, effort, and often financial resources. By providing clear boundaries, the scope ensures these resources are utilized effectively without wasted effort on peripheral issues.

Suppose a research study is looking at the impacts of social media usage on mental health. If the scope is too broad—like examining all social media platforms' effects on all demographic groups worldwide—then the research can quickly become unwieldy and hard to manage. It would involve vast amounts of data, requiring considerable time, resources, and computational power to analyze effectively.

However, if the scope is narrowed down—such as investigating the impact of Instagram usage on the mental health of teenagers in a specific city over the past five years—the research becomes far more manageable. This specific focus allows for a more in-depth analysis and likely will provide more meaningful, actionable results. This example illustrates the importance of appropriately defining the scope of research for its successful execution.

Determining the scope of your research

Setting the scope of your research project is a critical and delicate task. Below are steps, tips, and common mistakes to avoid when determining the scope of your research:

Steps to define the scope

• Identify Your Topic: The first step involves identifying and understanding your research topic. This knowledge will serve as a basis for determining the breadth and depth of your study.
• Define Your Research Questions: The research questions are the heart of your study. They will help you determine the specific areas your research should cover.
• Establish Boundaries: Clearly establish the geographical, temporal, and topical boundaries of your research. These boundaries will guide the range of your study.
• Choose Your Methodology: Decide on the research methods you will use as these will directly impact the scope of your study.

Tips for a manageable scope

• Stay Focused: Stay concentrated on your research questions. Do not stray into areas that aren't directly relevant.
• Be Realistic: Consider the resources (time, money, manpower) available. Ensure your scope is feasible given these resources.
• Seek Guidance: Consult with your academic advisor or peers for feedback on your proposed scope.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Overly Broad Scope: Avoid setting an overly broad scope which could result in an unmanageable and unfocused study.
• Too Narrow Scope: Conversely, a scope that is too narrow may miss important aspects of the research topic.
• Ignoring Resources: Not taking into account available resources when setting the scope can lead to a project that is impossible to complete.

Defining the scope of your research is a delicate balance, requiring careful consideration of your research questions, resources, and the depth and breadth of investigation needed to answer these questions effectively.

Importance of delimitations in research

In the context of academic research, "delimitations" refers to the choices made by the researcher which define the boundaries of the study. These are the variables that lead the researcher to narrow the scope of the study from its potential vastness to a manageable size.

Delimitations might include the geographic area where the study is confined, the participants involved in the study, the methodology used, the time period considered, or the specific incidents or aspects the study will focus on. Essentially, delimitations are the self-imposed limitations on the scope of the study.

Defining the delimitations of a research project is crucial for several reasons. Firstly, they establish the context or setting in which the study occurs. This, in turn, allows for the work to be reproduced in a similar context for verification or refutation in future studies.

Secondly, delimitations provide a way to narrow the scope of the research to a manageable size, thus avoiding the pitfall of an overly ambitious project. They help researchers to stay focused on the main research questions and prevent diversion into irrelevant aspects.

Finally, clearly defined delimitations enhance the credibility of the research. They offer transparency about the research design and methodology, which adds to the validity of the results.

For instance, in a research study examining the impact of technology on student achievement in a certain district, examples of delimitations might include focusing only on public schools, considering only high school students, and confining the study to a particular school year. These choices help to focus the research and ensure its manageability. Therefore, delimitations play a pivotal role in structuring and guiding an effective and efficient research study.

Setting delimitations for your research

Establishing appropriate delimitations for your research project is an important part of research design. Here are some steps, guidelines, and common mistakes to consider when setting your research delimitations:

Steps to establish delimitations

• Identify the boundaries: Begin by deciding the geographical region, time period, and subject matter your research will cover.
• Determine Your Research Population: Identify the specific population your study will focus on. This could be based on age, profession, geographical location, etc.
• Choose Your Research Methods: Decide the specific methods you will use to collect and analyze data, as these decisions will also set limitations on your study.

Guidelines for choosing delimitations

• Align with Your Research Objectives: The delimitations should be in line with your research questions and objectives. They should help focus your study without detracting from its goals.
• Be Practical: Consider the resources available, including time, funds, and access to data. Your delimitations should be feasible given these constraints.
• Seek Input: Consult with your research advisor or peers. Their feedback can help ensure your delimitations are appropriate and well thought out.

Common errors to avoid:

• Unrealistic Delimitations: Be wary of setting delimitations that are too stringent or ambitious to be feasible given your resources and timeframe.
• Undefined Delimitations: Avoid leaving your delimitations vague or undefined. This can lead to scope creep, where your project expands beyond its initial plan, making it unmanageable.
• Ignoring Delimitations: Once set, stick to your delimitations. Deviating from them can lead to a loss of focus and can compromise the integrity of your results.

Setting delimitations is a crucial step in research planning. Properly defined delimitations can make your research project more manageable, maintain your focus, and ensure the effective use of your resources.

The interplay between scope and delimitations

The relationship between scope and delimitations in academic research is a dynamic and interdependent one. Each aspect serves to shape and refine the other, ultimately leading to a focused, feasible, and effective research design.

The scope of a research project describes the breadth and depth of the investigation—what it aims to cover and how far it intends to delve into the subject matter. The delimitations, on the other hand, identify the boundaries and constraints of the study—what it will not cover.

As such, the scope and delimitations of a research study are intimately connected. When the scope of a study is broad, the delimitations must be carefully considered to ensure the project remains manageable and focused. Conversely, when the scope is narrow, the delimitations might be less constraining, but they still play a critical role in defining the specificity of the research.

Balancing the scope and delimitations is crucial for an efficient research design. Too broad a scope without carefully defined delimitations can lead to a study that is unwieldy and lacks depth. On the other hand, a very narrow scope with overly rigid delimitations might result in a study that overlooks important aspects of the research topic.

Thus, researchers must strive to maintain a balance—establishing a scope that is wide enough to fully explore the research topic, but also setting appropriate delimitations to ensure the study remains feasible and focused. In doing so, the research will be well-structured and yield meaningful, relevant findings.

Role of scope and delimitations in research validity

Scope and delimitations are fundamental aspects of research design that directly influence the validity, reliability, and replicability of a study.

Research validity refers to the degree to which a study accurately reflects or measures the concept that the researcher intends to investigate. A well-defined scope is critical to research validity because it clearly delineates what the study will cover. This clear definition ensures that the research focuses on relevant aspects of the topic and that the findings accurately reflect the concept under investigation.

Similarly, carefully thought-out delimitations contribute to research validity by identifying what the study will not cover. This clarity helps to prevent the study from straying into irrelevant areas, ensuring that the research stays focused and relevant.

In addition to contributing to research validity, scope and delimitations also influence the reliability and replicability of a study. Reliability refers to the consistency of a study's results, while replicability refers to the ability of other researchers to repeat the study and obtain similar results.

A clearly defined scope makes a study more reliable by providing a detailed outline of the areas covered by the research. This clarity makes it more likely that the study will produce consistent results. Moreover, clearly defined delimitations enhance the replicability of a study by providing explicit boundaries for the research, which makes it easier for other researchers to repeat the study in a similar context.

In summary, a well-defined scope and carefully thought-out delimitations contribute significantly to the validity, reliability, and replicability of academic research. They ensure that the research is focused, that the findings are relevant and accurate, and that the study can be reliably repeated by other researchers.

Examples of scope and delimitation in well-known research

• The Milgram Experiment: Stanley Milgram's famous psychology experiment sought to understand obedience to authority figures. The scope of this study was clearly defined—it focused on how far individuals would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming another person. However, delimitations were set to ensure manageability. Participants were delimited to male individuals, and the experiment was confined to a controlled laboratory setting. These delimitations allowed Milgram to manage the research effectively while maintaining the depth of his study on human behavior.
• The Framingham Heart Study: This ongoing cardiovascular study began in 1948 and is aimed at identifying common factors that contribute to cardiovascular disease. The scope of the research is broad, covering many aspects of lifestyle, medical history, and physical characteristics. However, the study set clear delimitations: it initially only involved adult residents of Framingham, Massachusetts. This geographical delimitation made this broad-scope study manageable and eventually yielded influential results that shaped our understanding of heart disease.
• The Marshmallow Test: This well-known study by Walter Mischel explored delayed gratification in children. The scope was clearly defined: the study aimed to understand the ability of children to delay gratification and how it related to future success. The delimitations of the study included the age of the participants (preschool children), the setting (a controlled experiment with a treat), and the measure of future success (academic achievement, ability to cope with stress, etc.). These delimitations helped keep the study focused and manageable.

In all these examples, the researchers set a clear scope to outline the focus of their studies and used delimitations to restrict the boundaries. This balance between scope and delimitation was key in conducting successful and influential research.

In academic research, defining the scope and delimitations is a pivotal step in designing a robust and effective study. The scope outlines the breadth and depth of the investigation, offering a clear direction for the research. Meanwhile, delimitations set the boundaries of the study, ensuring that the research remains focused and manageable. Together, they play a crucial role in enhancing the validity, reliability, and replicability of a study.

Understanding the interplay between scope and delimitations is key to conducting efficient research. A well-defined scope paired with thoughtfully set delimitations contribute to a study's feasibility and its potential to yield meaningful and applicable results. Mistakes in setting the scope and delimitations can lead to unwieldy, unfocused research or a study that overlooks important aspects of a research question.

Reviewing famous studies, like the Milgram Experiment, the Framingham Heart Study, and the Marshmallow Test, we observe how a balanced approach to setting scope and delimitations can result in influential and valuable findings. Therefore, researchers should give careful thought to defining the scope and delimitations of their studies, keeping in mind their research questions, available resources, and the need for balance between breadth and focus. By doing so, they pave the way for successful and impactful research outcomes.

Header image by Kübra Arslaner .

What is the Scope of the Study in Research?

The scope of the study explains the extent to which your research area will be explored, and the parameters the study will operate. It gives the reader and the writer an insight into what the study is aimed at and what should be anticipated.

This implies that the scope of the study should define the purpose of your study, the sample size and qualities, geographical location, the timeframe at which the study will be executed, theories the study will focus on, etc.

The scope of the study is just an aspect of research writing, and great attention needs to be taken not to go beyond what is expected. Therefore, the scope of the study sheds light on areas your study will cover and what it focuses on. What your study area is not going to focus on is of no relevance to your research study, and the scope of the study eliminates that.

How to write the scope of the study?

The scope of the study refers to the elements that will be covered in a research project. It defines the boundaries of the research. The scope is always decided in the preliminary stages of a study. Deciding it in the later stages creates a lot of ambiguity regarding the research goals. The main purpose of the scope of the study is that explains the extent to which the research area will be explored and thus specifies the parameters that will be observed within the study. In other words, it enables the researcher to define what the study will cover and the elements that it will not. Defining the scope helps the researcher acquire a high level of research and writing capability.

Goals of establishing the scope of the study

The following steps can help the researcher to effectively define the goals of establishing a scope of the study.

Identification of the project or research needs

The first step is to identify the research needs. This helps them set a benchmark from the first step. Identification of the ‘what’ and ‘why’ enables the researcher to clearly set the research goals and objectives and the manner in which they will be performed.

Confirmation of the goals and objectives of the research

The goals and objectives defined in the project scope should be aligned with the SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timeframe) guidelines, which are:

• Specific- this involves a clear specification of what the researcher wants to achieve. It involves specifying what, why and how things will be done. This reduces the chances of ambiguities and any misunderstanding in the future.
• Measurable- Goals should be measurable and dynamic so that constant feedback can be generated for improvement.
• Achievable- Research goals should be achievable with the resources that are available.
• Realistic- Goals should be easier to deliver so that complications that can hamper the quality of the research can be avoided. Other considerations to be kept in mind are the budget and timeline.  
• Time frame- lastly, the researcher should estimate whether the set goals can be achieved within the given time frame or not.

Expectations and Acceptance

The researcher should take into account the expectations of the research and how well the findings of the researcher will be accepted by the reader. For instance, will the findings of your study help in policymaking or not?

Identification of the constraints

there are always certain roadblocks in conducting research, such as environmental conditions, technological inefficiency and lack of resources. Identifying these limitations and their possible solutions in advance help achieve goals better.

Identifying the necessary changes

After the preliminary goals are set, the researcher must carry out some part of the research so that necessary changes that lead to waste of time and resources at later stages are reduced. For example, while conducting an interview, if the researcher believes that the sample size decided is too large or too small according to the scope of the study, then the researcher can make the necessary changes in that order to avoid wastage of time and resources.

Guidelines for writing the scope of the study

The major things that the researcher should keep in mind while writing the scope of the study are as follows.

• Time period: While writing the scope of the study the researcher should first mention or state categorically the time periods the study will cover. Generally, the researchers combine the scope of the study with the limitation of the study. These things are quite interwoven. The main difference between the two is that limitations further cover the points like monetary constraints or non-cooperation from the side of the target audience.
• Geography: In addition to this another major point that the researcher should keep in mind is that the scope of the study should state the specific aspect of the data that needs to be collected like the geographic locations and the variables.
• Research population: Another major aspect that should be involved while writing the scope of the study is the sample size or the population that the researcher has selected for the study. The sampling plan must clearly indicate the sample universe, target population, profile and sample size with justification.
• Theories: The researcher should state the academic theories that are being applied to the data collected so that the reader better knows the lens of the analysis. This is presented in the ‘theoretical framework’ section.
• Purpose: The scope of the study must indicate the purpose behind it. It must briefly define the larger picture, i.e. the overall goal the researcher is trying to achieve.  
• Limitations: It is impossible to avoid roadblocks in research. Every research is restricted in scope and is subjected to certain limitations. By acknowledging these limitations and how they are restricting the study makes its findings even more credible.

Consider the topic ‘Analysis of the role of social media on the educational development in India from 2000-2015’. The scope of the study for this research topic should include several roles within the mentioned time period. Further, it should also cover the mass media types that have been used in the analysis of the study also including the location and the sample size as well.

Scope of the study

With the increase in the number of social media users and its use in everyday communication at the individual and organizational levels, there has been a corresponding increase in its incorporation in educational development and especially in a country like India. In view of this situation, the present study analyzes the role of social media on the educational development of students. To this end, the study will also cover the changes in the usage of social media in the educational field over the time period ranging from 2000-2015. The scope of the study is restricted to select social media platforms, specifically Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. The empirical study in this research is restricted to five universities located across India, wherein the opinions of 30 teachers were studied in interview sessions. Further, the study also involves an analysis of students’ perspectives on the role of social media in education from the same university. Therefore the scope of this study is limited to India, and more specifically to those offering Arts and Science-related courses.

• Priya Chetty

I am a management graduate with specialisation in Marketing and Finance. I have over 12 years' experience in research and analysis. This includes fundamental and applied research in the domains of management and social sciences. I am well versed with academic research principles. Over the years i have developed a mastery in different types of data analysis on different applications like SPSS, Amos, and NVIVO. My expertise lies in inferring the findings and creating actionable strategies based on them. 

Over the past decade I have also built a profile as a researcher on Project Guru's Knowledge Tank division. I have penned over 200 articles that have earned me 400+ citations so far. My Google Scholar profile can be accessed here . 

I now consult university faculty through Faculty Development Programs (FDPs) on the latest developments in the field of research. I also guide individual researchers on how they can commercialise their inventions or research findings. Other developments im actively involved in at Project Guru include strengthening the "Publish" division as a bridge between industry and academia by bringing together experienced research persons, learners, and practitioners to collaboratively work on a common goal. 

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

proofreading

Believe in yourself, Prove yourself, Be yourself

Definition of the Scope of Study

The scope of a study explains the extent to which the research area will be explored in the work and specifies the parameters within the study will be operating.

Basically, this means that you will have to define what the study is going to cover and what it is focusing on. Similarly, you also have to define what the study is not going to cover. This will come under the limitations. generally, the scope of a research paper is followed by its limitations.

as a researcher, you have to be careful when you define your scope or area of focus. remember that if you broaden the scope too much, you might not be able to do justice to the work or it might take a very long time to complete. Consider the feasibility of your work before you write down the scope. Again, if the scope is too narrow, the findings might not be generalizable.

Typically, the information that you need to include in the scope would cover the following:

• General purpose of the study.
• The population or sample that you are study.
• The duration of the study.
• The topics or theories that you will discuss.
• The geographical location covered in the study.

Recent Posts

• iHumEnTech 2024 July 8, 2024

Academic Staff Personal Site

Although I am just someone who does some teaching, some research, and some writing but my dream still alive which is to live in the simplest way, in the way you like with fully appreciation and love.

“Believe in yourself, Prove yourself, Be yourself”

Latest News

• iHumEnTech 2024
• Experience as reviewer (Year 2024)
• Experience as reviewer (Year 2023)
• Post Viva Thesis’ Correction
• Research Method and Research Design
• Research Gap
• WoS or Scopus?
• Professional Certification Received
• Experiences as Coach of Certification and Workshop
• Experiences as Panel of Competition/Booth
• As Coach/Trainer
• As Conference Committee
• As Moderator/speaker
• As Reviewer
• As Viva Chair/Co-chair/Examiner (main/co)
• Certification
• News and Knowledge
• RG VicubeLab
• Teaching Courses (Current Semester)
• Teaching Courses (Previous Semesters)
• Course Materials
• Research Grants
• Current Research
• Completed research

Publication

• Journal Papers
• Conference Proceedings
• Books and Book Chapters
• Technical Reports and Other Publications

Supervision

• Undergraduate Supervision
• Main Supervisor (Master/PhD)
• Co-supervisor (Master/PhD)

Useful Links

History and future of business ecosystem: a bibliometric analysis and visualization

• Open access
• Published: 27 August 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Xia Zhang 1 ,
• Yue Yang 1 &
• Yun Chen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5123-1624 2  

The business ecosystem theory has developed rapidly in recent years and has become a hot topic in the field of business and management. However, the use of this concept is controversial. This study systematically reviewed literature published spanning nearly three decades from 1993 to 2022. In this paper, researchers designed an improved traceability method to retrieve literature based on data sources form Web of Science. VOSviewer and CiteSpace are adopted as two scientific atlas tools for information processing and visualization to evaluate the relationship between sub fields of business ecosystem. The findings show that the four branches of business ecosystem, i.e., innovation, platform, entrepreneurship and service, absorb theoretical ideas to varying degrees. Among them, the theoretical inheritance relationship of innovation branch is most clear, and gradually grows into the backbone of ecosystem research. Major contribution of this study is reflected in three aspects: Firstly, the improved traceability method provides a repeatable quantitative description process on the basis of significantly reducing researchers’ subjective participation. Secondly, from perspective of bibliometrics, the branch direction and key nodes of theory development are identified. Thirdly, the study helps identify the future development directions of business ecosystem, including innovation, digitalization, entrepreneurship, self-organization and the strategic transformation guided by emerging technologies.

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Open innovation in business models is as impactful as technological innovation (Chesbrough, 2007 ). At the end of the last century, companies like Apple and Wal-Mart achieved significant success through disruptive innovations based on open platform models. Their achievements have inspired managers and researchers to understand that, in today’s business environment, companies must transcend traditional organizational boundaries to tackle innovation challenges. They need to incorporate external supplements into their governance systems to overcome key bottlenecks that might lie outside organizational control (Adner, 2006 ). In this multi-faceted interaction structure, a system regarded as complex at one level can function as a component in a more extensive system (Christensen & Rosenbloom, 1995 ). Simple bilateral relations cannot fully explain the intricate value relationships among network members in such nested systems, necessitating a shift from existing linear value theories.

In this context, business ecosystem theory emerged. The term “ecosystem” originally described the interactions between organisms and their physical environment (Tansley, 1935 ). This concept has since expanded to encompass complex connections and dynamic evolution beyond natural sciences, profoundly influencing social science research. Business ecosystem theory, a product of interdisciplinary linkages, metaphorically bridges natural and social sciences, offering a groundbreaking business perspective: companies should be viewed not as isolated industry members but as part of a cross-industry business ecosystem (Moore, 1993 ). This theory provides a framework to bridge the gap between reality and theoretical understanding. Surprisingly, it did not gain significant research attention for a long time. Entering the new century, the concept of business ecosystems regained researchers’ interest, with the term appearing sporadically in business research fields. Significant milestones were reached a decade later with two influential studies published in Harvard Business Review (Iansiti & Levien, 2004 ; Adner, 2006 ), leading researchers to recognize the potential of business ecosystems to develop into a comprehensive theoretical knowledge system.

Business ecosystems are not naturally occurring; they are partially shaped by experimental and engineering design from various perspectives (Jacobides et al., 2018 ), reflecting the intentions of system designers. In these systems, each member occupies a unique niche, developing capabilities aligned with goals set by designers, collectively creating value for the entire network (Moore, 2016 ; Iansiti & Levien, 2004 ). System designers are typically one or more core enterprises, referred to as cornerstone companies or focal actors. They simplify complex connections among network participants by creating service, tool, or technology platforms, leveraging platform leadership to influence the innovation direction within the system (Cusumano & Gawer, 2002 ). Non-core companies usually do not rely on a single ecosystem; they benefit from cross-ecosystem operations and diversification strategies. Participation in ecosystems extends the operational scope of non-core firms, equipping them with the management capabilities and technical resources essential for innovation (Selander et al., 2013 ).

Given the diversity of stakeholders, ecosystem structures may represent some of the most extensive network structures in management research (Autio & Thomas, 2014 ). The broad membership facilitates the integration of ecosystem theory with other theoretical paradigms, evolving various ecological branches tailored to different application scenarios. This trait aided the dissemination of concepts in the early stages of theory development. However, with the rapid expansion of terminology usage and fine-grained theoretical applications, the notion of business ecosystems has shifted from being a premium to a discount, similar to a diversified entity (Khanna & Yafeh, 2007 ). Chaotic usage scenarios and blurred theoretical boundaries undermine the theory’s core values, threatening its legitimacy. Some scholars have sharply criticized this trend in recent years (Oh et al., 2016 ; Bogers et al., 2019 ), suggesting that “ecosystems” function more as a “conceptual umbrella” covering various viewpoints rather than a coherent scientific theory (Spigel, 2017 ).

The interdisciplinary nature of business ecosystem theory results in research being widely distributed across various disciplines and fields. This distribution leads to significant subjectivity in the literature review process. Consequently, our study reflects on the limitations of mainstream literature retrieval methods and proposes an improved “traceability method” for collecting literature. Our research focuses on the following three issues:

What is the main scope of relevant research on business ecosystem theory?

What is the logical relationship between the fields of ecological branching?

What are the theoretical development trends and future research directions?

The rest of this paper is structured into four parts. Section 2 introduces the research and data acquisition methods used in this study. Section 3 reveals fundamental information about the retrieved literature, such as growth trends and the distribution of disciplines and journals. Section 4 analyzes and interprets data concerning the three questions above using keyword co-occurrence, co-citation analysis, cluster distribution, burst detection, and timeline trends. Section 5 compares the traceability method used in this study with traditional search techniques and conducts cluster analysis for findings ; The final part, Sects. 6 & 7 summarizes the study, discussing future research directions in this field.

2 Methodology and data sources

The reasonable selection and filtration of literature are crucial factors that enable smooth and accurate research analysis. Traditionally, the data collection process in existing research comprises two main components: conditional restrictions (such as databases, core terms, subject areas, journals, ratings, etc.) and manual review. This study adheres to this approach for the initial phase of data collection and identifies two opposing challenges:

Subject area restrictions or stringent journal designations can compromise the integrity of research on the periphery.

Removing these restrictions risks limiting the scope to the direction of natural ecology.

This issue partly stems from the metaphorical nature of the business ecosystem concept itself.

To address this challenge, conventional methods often rely on a manual screening process, which increases the subjectivity of the investigator. A horizontal comparison of previous data collection methods highlights the prevalence of this issue. Even with the most stringent double restriction method (Tsujimoto et al., 2018 ), the screening rate for manual review exceeds 50% (see Table  1 below). Such intensive screening can introduce researchers’ personal biases, undermining the credibility of discussions on theoretical boundaries.

2.1 Improved traceability method

To address the challenges in the data collection process, this study developed a literature retrieval method based on concept traceability, using two key literatures as foundational points: (1) Moore’s article “Predators and Prey: A New Ecology of Competition” published in 1993, and (2) the monograph “The Death of Competition: Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems” published in 1996. The former marks the birth of the business ecosystem concept, while the latter provides the first comprehensive explanation of the theory. Given the expanding scope of ecosystem logic, traceability helps distinguish research based on the business ecosystem concept from those that are not. When an article cites these foundational works, it indicates that the author acknowledges a logical connection between their research and the business ecosystem concept, whether positively or critically. The data samples thus obtained form a necessary subset strongly related to business ecosystem theory.

Building on this foundation, researchers employed VOSviewer and CiteSpace for information processing and visualization. Both programs are designed to construct and view bibliometric maps (Eck & Waltman, 2010 ). VOSviewer excels in speed when handling large-scale maps and balances expressive drawing and functionality, while CiteSpace offers greater operability with a unique timeline view and burst detection function. Bibliometric maps provide a systematic method for researchers to understand the evolution of scientific fields and integrate various information to capture the latest technologies (Chen, 2017 ). This study combines the advantages of both tools to mine and expand information, ensuring that gaps in the sample are filled to meet the literature combing sufficiency requirements.

In summary, this research identifies the shortcomings of traditional methods in handling literature related to business ecosystems and proposes an improved traceability method to address the challenges of the manual review process in data collection.

2.2 Adopted data sources

This study uses the Web of Science (WOS) database as the primary data source. WOS is the leading platform for scientific citation search and analysis, supporting a wide range of scientific tasks across different knowledge areas and serving as a data set for large-scale, data-intensive research. When comparing different databases, WOS is typically regarded as the most stable (Harzing & Alakangas, 2016 ; Mongeon & Paul-Hus, 2016 ; Li et al., 2018 ). Although WOS lacks coverage of social science books (Waltman, 2016 ), this does not impact the study’s content.

Using the WOS citation function “Cited References,” 1106 items were retrieved that cited the 1993 baseline literature. Standard restrictions were applied to refine the target scope: selecting the “Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)” and “Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE)” qualification levels to enhance literature quality, restricting subject headings to include “ecosystem*” to ensure relevance, and selecting only “article” types, excluding “early access” articles. As of March 1, 2022, a total of 400 papers met these requirements. The 610 works citing the 1996 baseline monograph were similarly screened, resulting in 189 retained articles. The two literature sets were combined and deduplicated, yielding a final sample of 488 articles. Each document in the sample focuses on ecosystems and is influenced by Moore’s business ecosystem theory to varying degrees, identifying the sample as research “established on the basis of business ecosystem thinking.”

This information query process is general and traceable. For further review, two experts in related fields were invited to examine the samples and list any doubtful literature. If both experts had doubts about the same literature, it was excluded; if they disagreed, consensus was reached through discussion. The results showed that all sample documents successfully passed the review process.

3 Fundamental information of retrieved business ecosystem literatures

This section presents fundamental information about the retrieved literature to outline the contours of the business ecosystem field. It includes the distribution of publications by year, country and region, WOS field, journal, and research institution. Among these indicators, only the distribution ratios for years and journals sum to 1, while other items have cross-connections.

Figure  1 illustrates the growth trend of articles citing Moore’s foundational literature in the WOS database. The earliest related article appeared in 2004, confirming a decade-long period of relative silence for the theory. The research field entered an explosive growth phase around 2012, with the number of published papers continuing to rise after a brief fluctuation. Overall, more than half of the total published papers have been produced in the last three years. Currently, the research concept appears to have reached the mature stage of its life cycle, with the publication growth rate stabilizing.

The growth trend of articles in the field of business ecosystem

Figure  2 illustrates the distribution of documents across different countries and regions, segmented into three time periods represented by different colors. Prior to 2019, the top three countries by the number of articles were the USA, England, and China. In the subsequent two years, China’s share of published articles increased significantly, propelling it to the top rank. As of 2022, the top four countries in terms of total published documents are China, England, the USA, and Finland, with a significant gap between these and the following countries and regions.

Distribution of the sample articles in different countries and regions

Figure  3 demonstrates distribution of literature by different subject areas. “Management” and " Business” categories are the main research fields of this theory. At the same time, there are also a large number of research works involving this theory in the fields such as “Regional Urban Planning”, “Environmental Studies”, “Environmental Sciences” and “Green Sustainable Science Technology”. This suggests that ecosystem theory extends beyond stereotypes and builds bridges between multidisciplinary fields. This echoes our concern that “subject area restrictions or more aggressive designated journal restrictions undermine the integrity of the research fringes”.

The top 11 WOS categories by number of articles

In terms of journal distribution, the 488 articles in the sample are spread across 195 journals. Among these, Technological Forecasting and Social Change and Sustainability have notable quantitative advantages, with 47 and 37 papers published, respectively, accounting for 9.63% and 7.58% of the total. From the perspective of research institutions, the University of Cambridge and Tsinghua University are tied for the highest number of publications, although the University of Cambridge holds a more central position within the knowledge network.

4 Main scope of Business Ecosystem Literatures

This section further analyzes the commonalities and connections between the sample literature, describing the main scope of business ecosystem research using the bibliometric indices “co-occurrence” and “co-citation”.

4.1 Keywords co-occurrence

The full record information of 488 documents was imported into VOSviewer to analyze the co-occurrence of keywords. According to the bibliometric data, 2251 keywords were involved in the sample. To achieve better visualization, the co-occurrence threshold for keywords was set to 6 times, resulting in a visualization map with 135 items, as shown in Fig.  4 below:

Co-keyword network visualization on business ecosystem research

The 135 keywords formed 6 clusters, and the top eleven words sorted by “Total Link Strength” covered all six categories, as shown in Table  2 .

Researchers integrated high-order words calculated by frequency and centrality, categorizing them into three groups:

Initial Search Terms and Derivatives: This includes terms like ecosystem, business ecosystem, network, and business model. Here, the network is related and similar to the ecosystem, with the former being relationship-based and the latter purpose-based. An interesting distinction is that two companies within the same network structure can have vastly different business ecosystems due to differing value propositions (Adner, 2017 ).

Nominalized Verbs: This category includes words such as innovation, value creation, competition, evolution, and cooperation. These terms are highly expressive, reflecting the core of business ecosystem thought. Innovation is the most prominent word, indicating that all business ecosystem projects revolve around innovation. The concept encompasses both dynamic processes and outcomes compared to traditional ecological studies. Notably, “value creation” appeared 88 times, while terms like value distribution or value sharing were scarcely used, highlighting a preference and imbalance in theoretical development. The term competition, particularly in the context of Moore’s “death of competition,” refers to a shift from enterprise to ecosystem competition, often resulting in more intense conflicts between ecosystems.

Generic Terms: This includes words like strategy, performance, technology, knowledge, and framework. Strategy here implies a meso-level perspective, often higher than individual enterprises or industries but below the macro societal level. Performance emphasizes the effective output of ecosystem members, echoing the focus on value creation and reflecting a pursuit of research quantification by scholars.

4.2 Co-citation analysis

A key feature of science mapping is co-citation analysis. When two articles appear together in the bibliography of a third article, they form a co-citation relationship (Chen, 2006 ). The co-citation function identifies significant works in the study of inheritance relationships, isolating weakly related or unrelated literature. This process expands our focus from the 488 documents to those within their citation networks, allowing researchers to identify key research results that connect knowledge networks. Conclusions drawn from this approach are significant for discussions on boundary and genre divisions in business ecosystem theory.

According to bibliometric data, 9,725 citation sources were involved in the sample. By setting a minimum citation threshold of 20, 221 entries were included in the visual map, shown in Fig.  5 . This map highlights journals with significant attention in the field, briefly introduced as follows:

4.2.1 Harvard business review

Known for being forward-looking, it is the origin and cradle of business ecosystem theory, publishing significant works by Moore, Iansiti, and early Adner.

4.2.2 Strategic management journal

Known for outstanding works by Adner and Kapoor ( 2010 ), Jacobides et al. ( 2018 ), and Hannah and Eisenhardt ( 2018 ), these works are frequently cited and remain foundational.

4.2.3 Research policy

Notable for the number of articles published on ecosystems, significantly outperforming other journals in this index.

Using CiteSpace, co-citation analysis was conducted on key nodes. Full record information of 488 documents was imported, with the network clipping method set to “Pathfinder.” In the co-citation graph, node size represents the frequency of occurrences, and line thickness indicates co-occurrence frequency. Figure  6 shows two visualization perspectives of co-citation analysis:

Author Perspective: This map shows the shapers of theoretical foundations, key bottleneck breakthroughs, and continuous investment builders, emphasizing the historical significance of researchers.

Literature Perspective: This map observes field connections and sustained influence, emphasizing the importance of recent research results and depicting a more complex relationship structure between literature.

Co-citation analysis maps from the perspective of author (above) and literature (below)

Among the top ten authors with total citations, Moore, Iansiti, Adner, Jacobides, and Autio have been previously mentioned. Gawer and Nambisan will be introduced in clustering information and burst detection later. Porter and Teece, masters in strategic management and competitive strategy, also provide intellectual value for business ecosystem theory. Porter’s concept of creating shared value aligns with business ecosystem ideas (Porter & Kramer, 2011 ), focusing on value shared within the ecosystem. Teece’s most co-cited work explores innovative support for the digital platform ecosystem (Teece, 2018 ). Additionally, Eisenhardt stands out as a prominent node in the citation network, with her work improving the case study method being frequently cited (Eisenhardt, 2007 ).

This sector explored the scope of business ecosystem literature using co-occurrence and co-citation analyses. The analysis revealed the evolution of business ecosystem research and its integration with strategic management, highlighting the importance of shared value and digital platform ecosystems, and underscoring the historical and ongoing contributions to the field. In the following sector, we will compare the method used in this study with traditional search techniques.

5 Findings and discussion

5.1 comparison between new traceability method and traditional search techniques.

The traceability method proposed in this study offers significant advantages over traditional search techniques. Firstly, it aligns closely with the trajectory of business ecosystem theory, which has a well-documented origin and a ten-year quiescent period, effectively minimizing interference from multiple sources. Secondly, the literature sourced through this method directly links to the theoretical origin, aiding in excluding: 1) Passive fuzzing usage, where researchers use ecological concepts merely as a backdrop without engaging with the theoretical source; 2) Actively blurred usage, where authors may avoid acknowledging the theory’s historical importance for various reasons; 3) Same disciplinary usage, where the concept of ‘ecosystem’ is used differently within the same field, such as the interaction between businesses and natural ecology, without a significant inheritance relationship.

Thirdly, this method mitigates the impact of subjective biases, providing highly discriminative samples that help address contentious issues more effectively.

Although the proposed traceability method has certain limitations compared to traditional search techs, the study has effectively addressed these limitations. One limitation is that it omits documents without citation information, such as articles in the Harvard Business Review, which cannot be retrieved using citation data. Another limitation is the potential overemphasis on certain authors and their research teams, beyond the method’s intended scope. To address the first limitation, this study used bibliometrics to expand the sample and complete the knowledge network. Bibliometric methods employ quantitative approaches to describe, evaluate, and monitor published research, introducing a systematic, transparent, and repeatable review process, thereby enhancing review quality (Zupic & Čater, 2015 ). The second limitation regarding author prominence was addressed by analyzing work from Google Scholar, showing that most of Moore’s ecosystem-related work is independent, with the chosen base points having clear advantages in timelines and citation counts, suggesting that the influence of authorial weight is within acceptable limits.

This study also incorporated a control data set, applying traditional domain constraints like “Management or Business or Economics” and restricting the level to SSCI and SCIE, excluding articles with “early access”. The sample was manually reviewed, resulting in 579 out of 952 articles passing the review. Researchers further validated the new method’s unique advantages by conducting lexical clustering analysis on co-cited documents and comparing these with samples obtained via traditional searches. The analysis, supported by CiteSpace software, confirmed that clusters with a modularity (Q) value above 0.3 and a silhouette (S) value above 0.7 are considered structurally sound and efficient. The new method achieved Q values of 0.926 and S values of 0.952, surpassing traditional methods in creating more coherent and interconnected clusters. The traditional method resulted in scattered clusters with sparse connections, whereas the traceability method produced tightly integrated clusters, enhancing cross-disciplinary linkages and producing distinct cluster labels, which are illustrated in Figs.  7 and 8 .

Clustering comparison of traditional retrieval methods

Clustering comparison of traceability retrieval methods

Comparing the cluster profiles of the two groups of samples, the researchers found significant discrepancy. The clustering modules obtained under the traditional retrieval method are obviously scattered, and the connections between nodes are relatively sparse, while the modules are closely combined under the traceability method, covering more node in the intersection area. These articles serve as a key link between different fields. At the same time, the cluster labels extracted by the two methods are quite different. Tables  3 and 4 respectively list the clustering information of both two samples. The serial numbers are arranged according to the number of members in the group, and the correlation depends more on location of the cluster. With 25 members as the boundary, traceability samples form 7 categories above the scale, and this indicator is 8 in traditional samples. LSI and LLR represent two label extraction algorithms, which are carried out after the clustering ends and do not affect the shape of the clusters.

The results indicate that traditional clustering labels cover a broader range and include general terms like business model and digital platform, suggesting a less precise focus on the research field. New technology hotspots, such as digitization and the Internet of Things, have become central concepts in this theory. The traditional retrieval method often extends literature too far into adjacent disciplines. For example, the semantics of “service-dominant logic” overshadow “service ecosystem,” making it a key clustering label, while entrepreneurship literature is overrepresented, splitting the concept into “Entrepreneurial Ecosystem” and “Value Capture.” Additionally, “digital service” forms a loosely connected category, making it challenging to determine a stable relationship with business ecosystem theory. These issues highlight the negative impact of stringent field restrictions and intensive manual review on the scientific quality of literature samples.

5.2 Relationship between ecological branches and cluster analysis

Despite significant differences, both sample groups agree on basic concepts. They clearly delineate four ecosystem sub-concepts: innovation, platform, entrepreneurship, and service, aligning with mainstream business ecosystem reviews. Business, innovation, and platform clusters hold central positions, while entrepreneurship and service are relatively peripheral. The entrepreneurial ecosystem consistently forms an independent module with a stable member association structure. The following example will analyze the clusters generated according to the traceability method.

Cluster 0 is named as the entrepreneurial ecosystem, and this category has the most group members, and the top three papers with co-citation index are Spigel, 2017 ; Acs et al., 2017 ; Audretsch & Belitski, 2017 . Entrepreneurial flow is an incomplete ecosystem, which is generally limited by geography, and more consideration is given to analysis and research in conjunction with local cultural backgrounds and social systems. There are also barriers in the exchange of entrepreneurial ecosystems and external resources. Entrepreneurs often do not compete for market share, but sell an expectation to attract capital. Therefore, the entrepreneurial ecosystem is likely to lack a dominant player.

On a larger map scale, entrepreneurial ecosystems are connected to knowledge ecosystems, but their value propositions and relational structures are fundamentally different. The centers of the knowledge ecosystem are universities and public research institutions, and value flows mainly linearly along the value chain; the cornerstone of the business ecosystem is the leading company that provides key resources and business infrastructure, and the value creation process adopts an integrated approach (Clarysse et al., 2014 ). It can also be seen from the co-citation relationship that the logical connection between the two concepts is estranged and does not form a major clustering structure. It is worth noting that the process of converting knowledge to business value is still included in the field of business ecosystem research.

The label of cluster 1 is the subject word business ecosystem, and the top three documents in the co-citation index are Adner, 2017 ; Gawer & Cusumano, 2014 ; Oh et al., 2016 . According to Moore’s ( 2016 ) definition, business ecosystem is an economic community of suppliers, major producers, consumers, competitors, and other stakeholders whose members collectively develop their capabilities and tend to align with the direction set by one or more central companies. Iansiti and Levien ( 2004 ) summarized the roles of companies in the business ecosystem as cornerstone, dominant and niche; and constructed three health indicators for evaluating business ecosystems: productivity, robustness and niche creation. As can be seen from the two core literatures of business flow, the school starts from the role of stakeholders, studies the behavior and activities of the participants, and finally boils down to the value proposition of the system. Adner ( 2017 ) reads this process in reverse, starting with a value proposition, considering the activities needed to materialize it, and ending with actors that need to be adjusted. A logical deepening develops between the two schools, the former emphasizing roles and structural relationships, the latter emphasizing value propositions and changing processes. From the perspective of operational effects, starting from the value proposition helps to establish connections with potential participants and achieve multilateral interaction.

Cluster 3 is named platform ecosystem or two-sided marketplace. The top three articles in the co-citation index are Gawer, 2014 ; McIntyre & Srinivasan, 2017 ; Reuver et al., 2018 . Platform may be the fastest growing of all research streams. Under the trend of the Internet of Everything, any business form can be built on the platform, but only by focusing on platform behavior can it be regarded as a platform genre literature. Gawer ( 2014 ) defines an external platform as a product, service or technology, that is the ecological basis for an organization’s external innovators to develop their own complementary products, technologies or services. We also noticed that the platform is in a crossover zone, and its S value is only 0.852, which is in a low range. This means that its composition is more complex.

Cluster 4 is named Innovation Ecosystem, with an S-value of 0.965 being the highest in the list. This indicates a high homogeneity of the set. The top three papers in this cluster are Jacobides et al., 2018 ; Gomes et al., 2018 ; Hannah & Eisenhardt, 2018 . Jacobides et al., ( 2018 ) believes that the mainstream of ecological literature includes business flow, innovation flow and platform flow. The above-mentioned schools of business ecosystem theory have inherited the commonalities of ecosystem research. The ecological characteristics that have been agreed upon are modularity, complementarity, multilateral market relationships and common value proposition. This work by Jacobides is also the most recent explosive literature (Fig.  8 ). What deserves special attention is that the outbreak period of this document has not yet ended, and its second-ranked intensity score still has a large room for improvement.

The label of cluster 6 is service ecosystem, and the top three co-citation literatures are Vargo & Lusch, 2016 ; Lusch & Nambisan, 2015 ; Vargo et al., 2015 . Compared with the logic deepening of “role” to “structure” in the business school, the service school tends to transform from “product” to “service”. In this process, the service-dominant (S-D) logic is the core. Humorously, the research positions of Vargo and Lusch, the founders of S-D logic, may still be slightly different. Moore’s work is almost never cited in Vargo’s literature, while Lusch describes in detail the process of combining S-D logic and ecosystems: a relatively independent and self-regulating system consisting primarily of loosely coupled social and economic actors linked together by shared institutional logic and exchange of services to create common value (Lusch & Nambisan, 2015 ).

The top three co-citation literatures of other two clusters are Tsujimoto et al., 2018 ; Rong et al., 2015 ; Russell & Smorodinskaya, 2018 (cluster 3); and Adner & Kapoor, 2010 , Adner, 2012 ; Basole & Karla, 2011 (cluster 5). Due to space limitations, the introduction will not be carried out. Readers can read and refer to it by themselves. In particular, digitization has been inserted into multiple research streams and has the potential to develop into an independent digital ecosystem school. From the perspective of cohesion, the concept is only lack of landmark literature from the perspective of ecosystem.

6 Development trends and future research directions in business ecosystem

The burst detection function in CiteSpace is used to investigate the phenomenon of sudden increases in the frequency of research topics over a short period, with intensity indicating the level of attention to these hotspots. In the field of business ecosystem research, 43 outbreak literature nodes were initially identified using default parameters. By adjusting the criteria, researchers narrowed this down to the nine most significant pieces of literature.

As shown in Fig.  9 , these nine articles play a crucial role in the evolution of research directions. Business ecosystems and innovation ecosystems exhibit contrasting logical structures, forming at the intersection where a role-based perspective transitions to a structural perspective (Adner & Kapoor, 2010 ; Kapoor, 2018 ). The independence of the innovative school signifies a shift in ecosystem research from a metaphorical ecological relationship to the fundamental logic of business activities. Another critical aspect is examining the value creation and value capture processes as interconnected components (Ritala et al., 2013 ), which helps bridge the research gap resulting from an overemphasis on value creation.

The top 9 literatures by burst strength

Nambisan ( 2013 ) discussed the innovation ecosystem and entrepreneurial environment within the context of central platforms. Due to the overlapping meanings of “business ecosystem” and “innovation ecosystem,” this article serves as a bridge connecting the four main modules. The mixing of terms is common in platform research. In this context, Moore and Iansiti’s work is recognized for their research on platform-based business ecosystem innovation (Gawer & Cusumano, 2014 ). One of the figures summarizes literature related to the platform ecosystem and compares it with the literature flow of other platforms (Thomas et al., 2014 ).

Figure  10 illustrates the time axis map of the 13 main research lines. Solid lines indicate that a line has formed an emerging research area, while dotted lines suggest a cooling trend. Analysis shows that the two-sided market route transitioned to the innovation ecosystem route around 2018, with the business ecosystem branch completing this shift earlier. The convergence of these paths has fostered the growth of the innovation branch into a mainstream research line. The service path has developed steadily for a long period, though its popularity has waned in the past two years. The digital technology research series draws from multiple branches, with its influence steadily expanding, making it the route with the most development potential. Generally, the life cycles of Routes 2, 9, 10, 12, and 15 are relatively short and have been out of the spotlight for a long time. Conceptual fields such as entrepreneurship, innovation, Internet of Things, digitalization, and self-organization continue to release energy, with innovation and digitization leading the way.

Timeline map of main research routes

The research findings indicate that future development in the ecological domain will predominantly focus on innovation, digitization, entrepreneurship, self-organization, and strategic transformations driven by technologies such as the Internet of Things. Due to extensive digital scene construction and industrial digital transformation, digital ecosystem theory is well-grounded in practice and has the potential to evolve into a distinct research domain. Business ecosystem theory effectively captures the dynamic evolutionary process of value logic through three critical links: value creation, value capture, and value sharing. While there is substantial work on integrating value creation with value capture, research that intricately weaves these with value sharing remains scant.

Following the model proposed in our paper, relevant literature in the field has emerged. Consequently, we have adopted this traceable method to identify and review 17 documents published since March 2022, aiming to examine recent research developments. The key findings from this review are discussed below.

Yoon et al. ( 2022 ) examined the connection between business and biological ecosystems, suggesting that a key specie, a leader within a business ecosystem, can enhance its success by strategically managing symbiotic relationships; Shou et al. ( 2022 ) deconstructed business ecosystems into four aspects: complementarity, capabilities, co-creation, and co-evolution, noting that many of the world’s largest and most valuable companies adopt this ecosystem approach. The lack of a unified understanding of business ecosystem features and characteristics complicates the ability of business leaders to formulate and implement effective strategies; Hoeborn et al. ( 2022 ) developed a morphological framework describing all value systems and applied it to business ecosystems, linking its characteristics with ongoing inter-organizational research to aid practitioners in implementing ecosystem concepts; Chandrasekharan and Titov ( 2022 ) explored the business models within the ÜlemisteCity ecosystem to understand the conceptualization of business models and the factors influencing their creation or transformation from an ecosystem perspective, developing a conceptual framework to enhance organizational participation and value processes within ecosystems. Cui et al. ( 2022 ) explored how key enterprises govern their business ecosystems under conditions of resource abundance and resource scarcity.

Further studies have linked business ecosystems to various industries, exploring structural dimensions and standards for assessing industries. Chang et al. ( 2022 ) used fuzzy hierarchical analysis, fuzzy decision-making methods, and experimental laboratory methods to construct five evaluation dimensions and thirty-one evaluation criteria to explore the open data service industry from the perspective of the business ecosystem. Winkler et al. ( 2023 ) demonstrated how knowledge misalignment, knowledge gaps, cultural differences, insufficient building codes, frequently changing regulations, and the implementation of highly embedded innovations disrupt ecosystem coordination, by studying the challenges faced by business ecosystem coordination when implementing solar PV systems in the Swedish built environment. Zhao et al. ( 2022 ) explored the structure of the business ecosystem required for companies to achieve sustainable performance and investigated the open innovation that can be promoted on this basis. Mann et al. ( 2022 ) introduced orchestration as a concept to pursue this research opportunity, using it to observe digital transformation in business ecosystems. Fort ( 2023 ) studied productivity and fairness in the U.S. financial market from the perspective of the business ecosystem. Wei and Li ( 2023 ) researched the impact of platform strategies and niche strategies on corporate growth based on the perspective of business ecosystem positioning. Suuronen et al. ( 2022 ) revealed the significant impact of digital business ecosystems on the industry through a systematic literature review of the prerequisites, challenges, and benefits of manufacturing DBEs. Yi et al. ( 2022 ) examined stakeholder relationships, organizational learning, and business model innovation based on the perspective of business ecosystem research systems. Burström et al. ( 2022 ) integrated business and digital ecosystem literature to study the present and future of software ecosystems. Kokkonen et al. ( 2023 ) studied digital twin business ecosystems based on qualitative data collected from six case companies in the manufacturing industry. Marques-McEwan et al. ( 2023 ) investigated the transition to CE in the chemicals manufacturing industry, revealing the rules for creating circular business ecosystems. Zhu and Du ( 2023 ) investigated the impact on the value of existing business ecosystems when new innovations are introduced, through an event study of Google’s self-driving car announcement.

Collectively, these insights not only deepen academic understanding of business ecosystems but also guide enterprises in formulating and implementing effective strategies in today’s complex business landscape. As digital scene construction and industrial digital transformation continue to solidify the practical foundation for integrating digitalization with ecosystem theory, the direction is poised to evolve into an independent branch of study. However, research methodologies still require further refinement to broaden theoretical applicability. Facing these challenges, coupling business and social ecosystems offers a viable direction. Developing standards and regulatory frameworks to guide sustainable business ecosystem constructions and prevent capital-driven changes in cornerstone enterprises’ nature remain critical future research topics.

7 Conclusion

This paper designed an improved traceability method to retrieve literature related to business ecosystem theory in the WOS database, aiming to avoid interference from the stringent field restrictions and intensive manual screening typical of traditional retrieval methods. Co-occurrence, co-citation, and cluster analyses were used to outline the context of knowledge production, with research results visualized using two scientific mapping tools, VOSviewer and CiteSpace.

This study provides several key insights. Firstly, innovation, platform, entrepreneurship, and service, as main ecological branches, inherit business ecosystem theory to varying degrees. The innovation branch has a clear inheritance relationship and has become a new backbone of ecosystem research. The platform branch has a relatively loose association structure with extensive cross-links to other branches. The entrepreneurial branch’s unique theoretical application scenarios make it easily distinguishable. The service branch combines S-D logic with business ecosystem theory, but research progress on this branch’s ecosystem preference is slow due to S-D logic’s prominence. We identified the shapers of theoretical foundations, breakthroughs of key bottlenecks, and builders of continuous investment in each branch, focusing on nine key literatures that bridge different fields and play a significant role in ecosystem research development.

Although the study offers valuable references for scholars as discussed above, some limitations should be noted and addressed in future research. Firstly, the sample data is sourced from a single database, limiting journal coverage. Secondly, early literature citations are inconsistent, compounded by the impact of journal literature without citations, creating obstacles for vertical logical context and visual analysis. Finally, this article proposes a literature retrieval strategy based on the genealogy of concepts, using James Moore’s seminal works as temporal benchmarks, i.e. his1993 article “Predators and Prey: A New Ecology of Competition,” marking the inception of the business ecosystem concept; and his 1996 book, ‘The Death of Competition: Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems,’ which provided the first comprehensive interpretation of the theory. However, Moore’s introduction of the concept in 1993 did not gain academic acceptance until a decade later, with significant studies emerging only in 2022. This highlights the unique aspects of studying this concept. While the traceability method is suitable for historical research of business ecological theory, its application in other research domains may introduce noise, requiring careful judgment by researchers regarding specific circumstances. Therefore, discussing the limitations and applicability of this method to other fields is essential.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are derived from public domain resources, which are available in Web of Science.

Aarikka-Stenroos, L., & Ritala, P. (2017). Network management in the era of ecosystems: Systematic review and management framework. Industrial Marketing Management , 67 , 23–36.

Article   Google Scholar  

Acs, Z. J., Stam, E., Audretsch, D. B., & O’Connor, A. (2017). The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach. Small Business Economics , 49 (1), 1–10.

Adner, R. (2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard Business Review , 84 (4), 98.

Google Scholar  

Adner, R. (2012). The wide lens: A new strategy for innovation (Vol. 34). Penguin Uk. 9.

Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management , 43 (1), 39–58.

Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal , 31 (3), 306–333.

Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: Establishing the framework conditions. The Journal of Technology Transfer , 42 (5), 1030–1051.

Autio, E., & Thomas, L. (2014). Innovation ecosystems (pp. 204–288). The Oxford handbook of innovation management.

Basole, R. C., & Karla, J. (2011). On the evolution of mobile platform ecosystem structure and strategy. Business & Information Systems Engineering , 3 (5), 313–322.

Bogers, M., Sims, J., & West, J. (2019). What is an ecosystem? Incorporating 25 years of ecosystem research.

Burström, T., Lahti, T., Parida, V., Wartiovaara, M., & Wincent, J. (2022). Software ecosystems now and in the future: A definition, systematic literature review, and integration into the business and digital ecosystem literature. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management .

Chandrasekharan, N., & Titov, E. (2022). A Conceptual Framework of Business Model Innovation based on Business Ecosystem – A Case Study of Ulemiste City. The Proceeding of 12th International Scientific Conference , 2022.

Chang, Y. T., Chen, M. K., & Kung, Y. C. (2022). Evaluating a Business Ecosystem of Open Data Services Using the Fuzzy DEMATEL-AHP Approach Sustainability , 14(13), 7610.

Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology , 57 (3), 359–377.

Chen, C. (2017). Science mapping: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of data and information science , 2 (2).

Chesbrough, H. (2007). Business model innovation: it’s not just about technology anymore . Strategy & leadership.

Christensen, C. M., & Rosenbloom, R. S. (1995). Explaining the attacker’s advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network. Research Policy , 24 (2), 233–257.

Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy , 43 (7), 1164–1176.

Cui, M., Li, W., Cui, L., Jia, Y., & Wu, L. (2022). How do keystones govern their business ecosystems through resource orchestration? Industrial Management & Data Systems , 122 (9), 1987–2011.

Cusumano, M. A., & Gawer, A. (2002). The elements of platform leadership. MIT Sloan Management Review , 43 (3), 51.

de Gomes, V., Salerno, L. A., Phaal, M. S., R., & Probert, D. R. (2018). How entrepreneurs manage collective uncertainties in innovation ecosystems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 128 , 164–185.

De Reuver, M., Sørensen, C., & Basole, R. C. (2018). The digital platform: A research agenda. Journal of Information Technology , 33 (2), 124–135.

Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal , 50 (1), 25–32.

Fort, H. (2023). Productivity vs. evenness in the US Financial Market: A Business Ecosystem. Perspective Entropy , 25 (7), 1029.

Gawer, A. (2014). Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework. Research Policy , 43 (7), 1239–1249.

Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2014). Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management , 31 (3), 417–433.

Hakala, H., O’Shea, G., Farny, S., & Luoto, S. (2020). Re-storying the business, innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystem concepts: The model-narrative review method. International Journal of Management Reviews , 22 (1), 10–32.

Hannah, D. P., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2018). How firms navigate cooperation and competition in nascent ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal , 39 (12), 3163–3192.

Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics , 106 (2), 787–804.

Hoeborn, G., Conrad, R., Götzen, R., Betz, C., & Neudert, P. K. (2022). Understanding business ecosystems using a morphology of Value systems. Research-Technology Management , 65 (5), 44–53.

Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). Strategy as ecology. Harvard Business Review , 82 (3), 68–78.

Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal , 39 (8), 2255–2276.

Kapoor, R. (2018). Ecosystems: Broadening the locus of value creation. Journal of Organization Design , 7 (1), 1–16.

Khanna, T., & Yafeh, Y. (2007). Business groups in emerging markets: Paragons or parasites? Journal of Economic Literature , 45 (2), 331–372.

Kokkonen, K., Hannola, L., Rantala, T., Ukko, J., Saunila, M., & Rantala, T. (2023). Preconditions and benefits of digital twin-based business ecosystems in manufacturing. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing , 36 (5), 789–806.

Li, K., Rollins, J., & Yan, E. (2018). Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: A selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis. Scientometrics , 115 (1), 1–20.

Lusch, R. F., & Nambisan, S. (2015). Service innovation. MIS Quarterly , 39 (1), 155–176.

Mann, G., Karanasios, S., & Breidbach, C. F. (2022). Orchestrating the digital transformation of a business ecosystem. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems , 31 (3), 101733.

Marques-McEwan, M., Xu, B., Bititci, U. S., & Jiang, M. (2023). Unveiling the rules for creating circular business ecosystems: A case study in the chemical industry. Journal of Cleaner Production , 427 , 139185.

McIntyre, D. P., & Srinivasan, A. (2017). Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps. Strategic Management Journal , 38 (1), 141–160.

Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics , 106 (1), 213–228.

Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review , 71 (3), 75–86.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Moore, J. F. (2016). The death of competition: Leadership and strategy in the age of business ecosystems . HarperCollins.

Nambisan, S., & Baron, R. A. (2013). Entrepreneurship in innovation ecosystems: Entrepreneurs’ self–regulatory processes and their implications for new venture success. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice , 37 (5), 1071–1097.

Oh, D. S., Phillips, F., Park, S., & Lee, E. (2016). Innovation ecosystems: A critical examination. Technovation , 54 , 1–6.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Criação De valor compartilhado. Harvard Business Review , 89 (1/2), 62–77.

Ritala, P., Agouridas, V., Assimakopoulos, D., & Gies, O. (2013). Value creation and capture mechanisms in innovation ecosystems: A comparative case study. International Journal of Technology Management , 63 (3–4), 244–267.

Rong, K., Wu, J., Shi, Y., & Guo, L. (2015). Nurturing business ecosystems for growth in a foreign market: Incubating, identifying and integrating stakeholders. Journal of International Management , 21 (4), 293–308.

Russell, M. G., & Smorodinskaya, N. V. (2018). Leveraging complexity for ecosystemic innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 136 , 114–131.

Scaringella, L., & Radziwon, A. (2018). Innovation, entrepreneurial, knowledge, and business ecosystems: Old wine in new bottles? Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 136 , 59–87.

Selander, L., Henfridsson, O., & Svahn, F. (2013). Capability search and redeem across digital ecosystems. Journal of Information Technology , 28 (3), 183–197.

Shou, Y., Shi, Y., & Ren, G. J. (2022). Deconstructing business ecosystems: Complementarity, capabilities, co-creation and co-evolution. Industrial Management & Data Systems , 122 (9), 1977–1986.

Spigel, B. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice , 41 (1), 49–72.

Suuronen, S., Ukko, J., Eskola, R., Semken, R. S., & Rantanen, H. (2022). A systematic literature review for digital business ecosystems in the manufacturing industry: Prerequisites, challenges, and benefits. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology , 37 , 414–426.

Tansley, A. G. (1935). The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology , 16 (3), 284–307.

Teece, D. J. (2018). Profiting from innovation in the digital economy: Enabling technologies, standards, and licensing models in the wireless world. Research Policy , 47 (8), 1367–1387.

Thomas, L. D., Autio, E., & Gann, D. M. (2014). Architectural leverage: Putting platforms in context. Academy of Management Perspectives , 28 (2), 198–219.

Tsujimoto, M., Kajikawa, Y., Tomita, J., & Matsumoto, Y. (2018). A review of the ecosystem concept—towards coherent ecosystem design. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 136 , 49–58.

Van Eck, N., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics , 84 (2), 523–538.

Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , 44 (1), 5–23.

Vargo, S. L., Wieland, H., & Akaka, M. A. (2015). Innovation through institutionalization: A service ecosystems perspective. Industrial Marketing Management , 44 , 63–72.

Waltman, L. (2016). A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics , 10 (2), 365–391.

Wei, Z., & Li, M. (2023). Platform strategy, Niche Strategy, and firm growth: A Business Ecosystem Positioning Perspective. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management .

Winkler, C., Vico, E. P., & Widén, K. (2023). Challenges to business ecosystem alignment when implementing solar photovoltaic systems. The Swedish built environment, Building Research & Information.

Yi, Y., Chen, Y., & Li, D. (2022). Stakeholder ties, organizational learning, and business model innovation: A business ecosystem perspective. Technovation , 114 , 102445.

Yoon, C., Moon, S., & Lee, H. (2022). Symbiotic relationships in business ecosystem: A systematic literature review. Sustainability , 14 (4), 2252.

Zhao, T., Koo, J. M., & Lee, M. J. (2022). How firms can improve sustainable performance on belt and Road initiative. Sustainability , 14 (21), 14090.

Zhu, X., & Du, K. (2023). Incumbent business ecosystems in the face of new entry: An event study of Google’s autonomous car announcement. Information & Management , 60 (3), 103760.

Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods , 18 (3), 429–472.

Download references

The research leading to these results received funding from Chongqing Education Commission, under Grant Agreement No.: 23SKGH138: “Research on the relationship between the ecological dominance of chain owner enterprises, supply chain integration and supply chain innovation performance”.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Economics and Management School, Chongqing Jiaotong University, Chongqing, P.R. China

Xia Zhang & Yue Yang

Salford Business School, The University of Salford, Salford, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yun Chen .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

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

Zhang, X., Yang, Y. & Chen, Y. History and future of business ecosystem: a bibliometric analysis and visualization. Environ Dev Sustain (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-05318-6

Download citation

Received : 07 September 2023

Accepted : 17 August 2024

Published : 27 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-05318-6

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

• Business ecosystem
• Literature visualization, traceability method
• Co-citation
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research