This chapter corresponds to code in the researcherRAG repository
View CLI Source🔬
Methodology Comparison
Compare different research methodologies used in your literature corpus. Understand the strengths, limitations, and appropriate use cases for each approach.
📋 When to Use This Prompt
- ✓ Justifying your chosen methodology for a study
- ✓ Understanding methodological diversity in the field
- ✓ Identifying gaps in research approaches
- ✓ Writing methodology sections of papers
Prompt Template
Compare the three main methodologies used in my papers:
1. Experimental (RCT)
2. Quasi-experimental
3. Mixed methods
For each, provide:
- Strengths
- Limitations
- Recommended use scenarios
- Cite specific papers as examplesExpected Output Structure
## Methodology Comparison (137 papers)
### 1. Experimental (RCT) - 18 papers (13.1%)
**Strengths**
- Strongest causal inference [Smith et al., 2023]
- Control for confounds through randomization
- Gold standard for intervention effectiveness
- Clear treatment vs control comparison
**Limitations**
- Resource intensive (time, cost) [Lee & Kim, 2022]
- Limited external validity (lab settings)
- Ethical concerns for educational interventions
- High attrition rates (avg 18.5% in reviewed studies)
**Recommended Use Scenarios**
- Testing new intervention effectiveness
- Comparing two or more teaching methods
- When causal claims are priority
- Sufficient sample and resources available
**Example Papers**
- [Smith et al., 2023] - 12-week RCT with 120 students, waitlist control
- [Martinez, 2024] - Cluster-randomized trial (15 classrooms)
- [Park et al., 2023] - Pre-registered RCT with active control
---
### 2. Quasi-Experimental - 32 papers (23.4%)
**Strengths**
- More practical in real-world settings [Johnson, 2021]
- Lower cost and faster to implement
- Better external validity (naturalistic)
- Feasible when randomization impossible
**Limitations**
- Cannot rule out selection bias
- Confounding variables harder to control
- Weaker causal claims than RCT
- Requires careful statistical adjustments
**Recommended Use Scenarios**
- Evaluating existing programs
- When randomization is unethical/impractical
- Large-scale educational implementations
- Exploratory intervention research
**Example Papers**
- [Johnson & Davis, 2021] - Non-equivalent control group design
- [Chen, 2022] - Propensity score matching to reduce bias
- [Wilson, 2020] - Interrupted time series design
---
### 3. Mixed Methods - 25 papers (18.3%)
**Strengths**
- Comprehensive understanding (why + what) [Martinez, 2024]
- Qualitative explains quantitative findings
- Captures context and nuance
- Triangulation increases validity
**Limitations**
- Time and resource intensive
- Requires expertise in both paradigms
- Integration challenges (qual + quant)
- Longer timeline than single-method
**Recommended Use Scenarios**
- Complex interventions with multiple outcomes
- Understanding mechanisms behind effects
- Exploratory + confirmatory research
- When numbers alone insufficient
**Example Papers**
- [Martinez, 2024] - Convergent design (survey + interviews)
- [Lee & Kim, 2022] - Explanatory sequential (RCT → focus groups)
- [Park, 2023] - Embedded design (RCT with qual observations)
---
### Summary: Choosing a Methodology
| Criterion | RCT | Quasi-Experimental | Mixed Methods |
|-----------|-----|-------------------|---------------|
| **Causal inference** | Strongest | Moderate | Varies |
| **Resource needs** | High | Moderate | High |
| **External validity** | Lower | Higher | Highest |
| **Flexibility** | Low | Moderate | High |
| **Timeline** | 6-12 months | 3-6 months | 9-18 months |
| **Sample size needs** | Large (>50/group) | Moderate | Moderate |
### Trends in the Literature
- **2010-2015**: RCT dominance (64% of studies)
- **2016-2020**: Shift to quasi-experimental (practical constraints)
- **2021-2024**: Rise of mixed methods (complexity demands)Customization Options
Compare Different Methodologies
Compare these methodologies used in my papers:
1. Case studies
2. Ethnography
3. Grounded theory
For each, provide strengths, limitations, use cases, and example citations.Focus on Data Analysis Methods
Compare data analysis methods used across studies:
1. Structural equation modeling (SEM)
2. Regression analysis
3. Thematic analysis
4. Content analysis
For each:
- When used (sample, design)
- Software tools mentioned
- Strengths/limitations
- Example papersQualitative Methods Only
Compare qualitative approaches in my database:
1. Interviews (structured, semi-structured, unstructured)
2. Focus groups
3. Observations (participant, non-participant)
4. Document analysis
For each:
- Sample sizes typically used
- Data collection procedures
- Analysis approaches
- Quality criteria (credibility, transferability)Common Follow-up Questions
- Q: "Which methodology had the highest citation counts?"
- Q: "Show me RCT studies with strong internal validity"
- Q: "What are common threats to validity in quasi-experimental studies?"
- Q: "Which mixed methods designs are most popular?"
- Q: "Compare quantitative vs qualitative sample sizes"
Pro Tips
🎯 Justify Your Choice
Use this comparison to justify your methodology: "Based on 18 RCT studies in similar contexts [citations], this design is appropriate for..."
📊 Identify Gaps
If one methodology is underused, that's a research opportunity. "Only 5 studies used longitudinal designs, representing a gap..."
🔍 Quality Assessment
Not all RCTs are equal. Ask follow-ups about quality indicators (randomization procedure, blinding, attrition, etc.)
📖 Learn from Examples
Read the cited example papers to see how researchers executed each methodology well (or poorly).