It's more difficult to identify methodological gaps than theorical gaps in manangement research. Maybe you can try it with some mathematical logic.Otherwise you have to compare the method to the theory to find methodological gaps. Good luck!
To identify methodological gaps, you must understand the limitation of the one used. You should identify for instance assumptions that were violated and try to suggest the alternative. For instance in correlation analysis there are assumption to parametric test and nonparametric test. One you find that one of the assumption is violated, the result may be biaised. In such way you have identified the weakness of the method.
I can recommend reading the following article. You may get it through Google Scholar:
- Manuela Marra; Carla Di Biccari; Mariangela Lazoi; and Angelo Corallo (2017) A Gap Analysis Methodology for Product Lifecycle Management Assessment, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Volume 65, Issue 1.
1. By Proper review of literature. Have an excel sheet with various points (on Youtube various videos exist on it) to be noted from each RoL. at last entire list will tell you where is the gap in Methodology.
2. As you are an experienced researcher from other researches comparison also it can be found.
Tharindu Dananjaya Weerasinghe would you please help me to find the source of this wonderful figure ? I could not find Kumar DM. (2020) as written at the top of the image. Thanks
A methodological gap refers to a deficiency or inadequacy in the research methods or approach used in a particular study or field. Identifying a methodological gap involves recognizing a limitation or area for improvement in the methodology employed. Here are some steps to help you identify a methodological gap:
Understand the research context: Familiarize yourself with the subject area and the specific research topic of interest. Gain a clear understanding of the existing literature, theories, and methodologies commonly employed in the field.
Review previous studies: Conduct a comprehensive review of relevant literature and examine previous studies that have addressed similar research questions or topics. Look for common trends, methodologies, and approaches used in these studies.
Identify limitations or gaps: Analyze the existing literature critically and identify any limitations or gaps in the methodologies used. Consider factors such as sample size, research design, data collection methods, data analysis techniques, or theoretical frameworks employed. Look for areas where the methods used may have restricted the study's scope, validity, generalizability, or reliability.
Evaluate research objectives and questions: Assess the research objectives and questions of the study you are examining or conducting. Determine if the selected methodology adequately addresses these objectives and research questions. Look for areas where the current methodology may fall short in providing a comprehensive understanding or solution.
Consider alternative approaches: Explore alternative methodologies that could potentially address the identified limitations or gaps. Consider different research designs, data collection techniques, statistical analyses, or theoretical frameworks that may offer more robust or nuanced results. Assess whether these alternative approaches would better align with the research objectives and questions.
Consult with experts: Seek the input of experts or researchers in the field. Engage in discussions or collaborate with colleagues who have expertise in the specific research area to gain their insights and perspectives on potential methodological gaps. They may provide valuable feedback or suggest alternative methodologies.
Justify the identified gap: Once you have identified a methodological gap, it is important to provide a rationale for why the gap exists and why addressing it is necessary. Clearly articulate the limitations or deficiencies in the current methodology and explain how rectifying the gap would enhance the validity, reliability, or overall quality of the research. Source Chat GPT Retrieved 24/5/2023