Work through one lesson at a time. Try the tools, practise with an example and write a research decision brief you can explain.
8 lessons · About 35 minutes, plus practice
Prefer a printable booklet?
Prefer a booklet? Save all lessons, examples and your brief as a PDF using your browser’s print dialog.
Lesson 1 of 8 · About 4 minutes
Start with a research question
By the end: Turn a broad topic into a question that can guide a method choice.
Atlas is a teaching and reference tool for students, supervisors, lecturers and researchers. Use it when planning a proposal, preparing a supervision meeting, learning an unfamiliar method or comparing approaches. It connects philosophies, designs and techniques across six layers. It does not collect or analyse your data, write a dissertation, approve ethics or certify a design.
1
Name the question, people and setting
Write one sentence beginning with how, what, why, whether or to what extent. Specify the people, organisation, material or system you intend to study. Start with the question rather than a favourite method or software package.
What you should have: A bounded question, such as: How do first-year commuter students describe belonging during their first semester?
2
Decide what an answer would look like
Would an answer explain experiences, describe a pattern, estimate an effect, predict an outcome, develop something or bring existing studies together? Different aims may require different evidence. Separate a question about association from a claim about cause.
What you should have: A plain-language purpose: I want to understand students’ accounts of belonging.
3
List the access you actually have
Record the evidence you could obtain, permissions still needed, your skills and the time available. Access to a class does not automatically mean permission to use its records or recruit its students.
What you should have: An honest starting constraint: potential interview access, subject to institutional approval and consent.
A concrete example
“Student wellbeing” is a topic. “How do postgraduate students describe managing assessment pressure during a taught semester?” is a question. “Does a support programme reduce stress?” asks something different and needs a design capable of supporting that claim.
Pause and explainYou want to know why students avoid a service, but all you currently have is an attendance total. What is missing?Reveal reasoning
Attendance totals can describe use. They do not by themselves explain students’ reasons. Revise the question to fit the evidence, or plan an appropriate way to investigate experiences and explanations, with permission.
Watch for this: Do not treat a method that appears first in Atlas as the correct answer. The output you need is a reasoned shortlist and a plan for checking it.
The practice link opens in a new tab. Return to this tab to keep your place in the lesson.
Lesson 2 of 8 · About 4 minutes
Find your way around Atlas
By the end: Choose the shortest route to an entry and understand the six layers.
Choose Training for lessons and practice. Choose Research tools to open the Method library. The tool menu also gives you Find a method, Compare, Sources and an optional Visual map.
1
Choose a route that matches your task
From the home page, Start guided training opens these lessons. If you already have a question, choose Find a method for my question. If you know a term, choose Open the method library. Training remains available in the main navigation while you use the tools.
What you should have: You know where to continue learning and where to find the research tools. The tools use the same catalogue.
2
Use the layers as research decisions
Foundations: philosophy, ethics and quality addresses assumptions and responsibilities. Research design asks how the enquiry works. Review and synthesis considers existing research. Sampling and measurement addresses cases and measures. Data collection addresses evidence generation. Analysis addresses how that evidence becomes an answer.
What you should have: A project can draw on several layers. A design, a collection technique and an analysis method may work together.
3
Use the visual map when it helps
Choose Visual map in the Research tools menu. This view is optional. On a large screen, drag the map to rotate it. Use Pause motion to keep the map still, Zoom in, Zoom out and Reset camera. Choose a layer, then a named method or its glyph. Use the method list and its Previous/Next method window buttons for large layers. On smaller screens, choose the layer cards and method buttons.
What you should have: Selecting a method opens its profile. Family colour and shape identify qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods associations; position is an organising metaphor and glyph size reflects connections.
A concrete example
A qualitative case study is a design. Semi-structured interviews are a collection technique. An analysis approach addresses interpretation. Comparing these as if only one could be chosen would confuse complementary decisions.
Pause and explainA method has a larger glyph and sits near another method. Does this show that it is better or statistically more similar?Reveal reasoning
No. Size reflects curated connections, and spatial position organises the display. Neither is a quality score, an effect size nor a measured similarity.
Watch for this: The desktop map is optional. Method library and the method list provide direct text-based routes, including for keyboard users.
The practice link opens in a new tab. Return to this tab to keep your place in the lesson.
Lesson 3 of 8 · About 5 minutes
Search and inspect one method
By the end: Find an entry, check its fit and read all four tabs.
A useful method choice needs more than a definition. Every entry gives you a way to check purpose, requirements, limitations and published scholarship.
1
Find Ethnography in Method library
Choose Method library and enter Ethnography in Search methods. If filters are active, remove their labelled chips or choose Show filters, then Reset all filters. Select the method name. For a search across the full catalogue, use Search in the header or Control K / Command K.
What you should have: The Ethnography profile opens. Search covers names, aliases and descriptive information; filters narrow the results in the Method library and Visual map.
2
Read Overview before looking for instructions
Read what the approach is, When it fits, Strengths, Limitations and Know the boundary. Write one reason it might fit your question and one reason it might not. Notice whether the entry is a philosophy, a design or a technique.
What you should have: A provisional judgement with a limitation, rather than a copied definition.
3
Work through the other three tabs
Worked study explains a real publication and its cautions. In practice sets out minimum data and access, a workflow, tools, assumptions and a relative planning horizon. Sources provides the reading links. Read these in turn and follow one original source.
What you should have: You can name the evidence required, explain one practical step and identify a source to read in full.
4
Follow a connection with a purpose
Select a Connected methods entry at the bottom of the profile. Ask whether it offers an alternative design or a complementary technique. Use your browser’s Back button to return to the previous entry.
What you should have: You can explain why the connection matters to your project, rather than merely visiting more entries.
A concrete example
If your question concerns everyday practices in a setting, Ethnography may be worth reading. If you only have time for a few one-off interviews, do not assume that calling the project ethnography makes sustained contextual engagement unnecessary.
Pause and explainWhere would you check access requirements, and where would you check what a published study actually did?Reveal reasoning
Open In practice for minimum data and access. Read Worked study, then follow Read the original paper to examine the publication itself.
Watch for this: A worked explanation is a learning aid. Some examples are methodological papers or audits, not empirical studies. Check the label and read the original before citing it.
The practice link opens in a new tab. Return to this tab to keep your place in the lesson.
Lesson 4 of 8 · About 5 minutes
Build and challenge a shortlist
By the end: Complete the four finder questions and interpret the results responsibly.
Find a method offers a starting point with reasons. It uses transparent rules, not a validated diagnostic instrument. Its suggestions are candidates to investigate, not approval to proceed.
1
Choose the purpose of your question
Open Find a method. For the commuter-student example, choose Understand meaning and experience. Select Continue. Choose the purpose that best represents your actual question rather than the answer you hope to obtain.
What you should have: The Evidence step appears. If Continue is disabled, select an answer first.
2
Choose available evidence and discipline
For the example, select Text & talk, then Continue. Choose Education, then Continue. You can select several evidence types when they are genuinely available. If none of the five disciplines fits, select Other or not sure to search across the catalogue.
What you should have: You reach the Time step after specifying purpose, evidence and discipline.
3
Choose a realistic planning horizon
Select Medium for this teaching example and Build my shortlist. Short, Medium and Extended are relative categories. Factor in permissions, recruitment, training, analysis and writing; they are not promised completion times.
What you should have: Up to six candidates appear with reasons and a Before you choose note, or a message explains that no close match was found.
4
Challenge each candidate
Open two candidates and read their prerequisites and limitations. Use Revise answers to explore how a genuine change in your question or access changes the shortlist. Do not invent access simply to obtain a preferred suggestion.
What you should have: You retain candidates you can justify, and note what you still need to investigate. Results may include approaches with a longer planning horizon, explicitly flagged for attention.
A concrete example
For meaning, Text & talk, Education and Medium, investigate the candidates in the current shortlist. You might compare a focus on lived experience with a bounded case in context. The title of your topic alone cannot decide between them.
Pause and explainThe finder returns no close match. What should you do next?Reveal reasoning
Recheck whether the purpose and available evidence fit one another. Use Method library to inspect alternatives, or discuss feasibility with your supervisor. No close match is useful feedback, not a reason to pretend different data are available.
Watch for this: A shortlist does not check every assumption or institutional requirement. A method can match a broad evidence category and still be unsuitable for your specific dataset or question.
The practice link opens in a new tab. Return to this tab to keep your place in the lesson.
Lesson 5 of 8 · About 4 minutes
Compare choices at the same level
By the end: Use Compare to record a defensible tradeoff between two or three entries.
Comparison is most useful when you know which decision you are making. Compare alternative designs with designs, or alternative analyses with analyses. Cross-layer comparisons can help assemble a project, but their entries often complement one another.
1
Add two candidate entries
Open a profile and select Add to comparison, or use its Compare checkbox in Method library. Add another entry. Try Phenomenology and Qualitative case study for an exercise about experiences and context.
What you should have: The comparison count increases. You can select up to three entries.
2
Open the comparison view
Choose Compare in the header or Compare entries in the tray. Read Layer, Purpose and Choose when first. On a narrow screen, scroll the table horizontally to see every selected column.
What you should have: The same attributes are shown side by side. One selection prompts you to add another.
3
Make the tradeoff explicit
Read Evidence required, Limitations, Assumptions & quality and Planning horizon. Record what you gain, what you lose and what you must arrange. Use Remove when you need room for a different candidate.
What you should have: A sentence such as: I am investigating a bounded programme in its institutional setting, so I will examine a case-study design and justify its boundaries and evidence sources.
A concrete example
For a question about the meaning of an experience, a phenomenological approach may be relevant. For a question about a bounded programme in context, investigate a case-study design. Read each approach’s assumptions before treating this distinction as sufficient justification.
Pause and explainYou compare interviews with a case study. Must you select only one?Reveal reasoning
No. An interview is a way to collect evidence; a case study is a design. Interviews may contribute to a case study, alongside other appropriate sources. Identify the decision layer first.
Watch for this: Comparison selections save in this browser when storage is available. They do not sync across devices. Use Add these entries to my decision brief, then download your brief to keep a copy.
The practice link opens in a new tab. Return to this tab to keep your place in the lesson.
Lesson 6 of 8 · About 5 minutes
Read, verify and cite
By the end: Move from an Atlas summary to a source-based methodological rationale.
The strongest use of Atlas is as a route into scholarship. A short profile is designed to help you begin reading and questioning, not to stand in for the original argument.
1
Find a source that answers your decision
Open Sources on an entry, or choose Sources in the Research tools menu and browse by layer. Start with a methods reference for the approach and a worked publication for its application. Publisher pages may require institutional access; check your university library for a lawful full-text copy.
What you should have: You have bibliographic details and an original publication to investigate, not just the Atlas summary.
2
Read for fit, execution and limits
Ask what question the authors asked, which evidence they used, how they analysed it and which limitations they acknowledged. Distinguish an empirical application from a methods paper, reporting checklist or audit.
What you should have: A short note linking a source to a particular claim you can support.
3
Write in your own project’s terms
Explain why the approach fits your question and available evidence. State a limitation and how you will handle it. Cite the original work you actually read using your institution’s required style. Verify author, year, title and DOI or URL against the original.
What you should have: A rationale based on your project, with a source supporting the reasoning rather than decorating it.
A concrete example
Draft structure: “To investigate [question], I propose [design] using [evidence]. This fits because [reason supported by a source I have read]. A key limitation is [limit]; I will address it by [action]. My claims will remain within [boundary].”
Pause and explainYou have read an Atlas summary but cannot access the paper. Can you imply that you read the original?Reveal reasoning
No. Keep track of what you actually consulted. Seek library access or another suitable source, and follow your institution’s rules for secondary citation if needed. Do not invent a quotation, page number or finding.
Watch for this: A reporting checklist supports reporting. It does not, by itself, establish that a design is appropriate or that the study is high quality.
The practice link opens in a new tab. Return to this tab to keep your place in the lesson.
Lesson 7 of 8 · About 5 minutes
Turn exploration into a project plan
By the end: Create a concise record to take to a supervisor or research team.
Learning should leave you with a decision you can explain. Choose 3. My decision brief in the Training sections to join together your question, method, evidence, quality checks and next actions. Its sections also provide a starting structure for a proposal or methodology chapter; follow your course requirements.
1
Record the chain of decisions
Write the question and purpose, then distinguish philosophy or approach, design, sampling and measurement, collection and analysis where relevant. A literature review may be a component of another design or the principal design of your project.
What you should have: A coherent relationship between the question and the proposed evidence, rather than a list of impressive method names.
2
Identify your main feasibility and quality risks
Note access or permission gaps, likely recruitment constraints, measurement or interpretation issues, skills needed and the limits of the claims you intend to make. Follow your institution’s ethics and data-management processes before collecting data.
What you should have: Two or three concrete issues to discuss, with actions and people who can help resolve them.
3
Prepare for a supervision conversation
Choose one preferred approach and one plausible alternative. Bring the comparison, the source notes and your unanswered questions. Ask what would need to change for the alternative to be preferable.
What you should have: A decision brief you can print or download from the worksheet, ready for discussion and revision.
A concrete example
A useful next action is “Ask the programme lead whether anonymised attendance data can be accessed through the approved process.” “Collect more data” is not yet a practical action because it does not say which evidence, from whom or with what permission.
Pause and explainWhat would make a supervisor conversation more productive than saying “Atlas recommended this method”?Reveal reasoning
Bring your question, available evidence, two candidate approaches, a source-based reason for your preference, a limitation and one unresolved decision. Make your reasoning inspectable.
Watch for this: The worksheet saves only in this browser when storage is available. It does not sync across devices or submit work to a tutor. Use fictional or non-identifying notes and download a copy you want to keep.
The practice link opens in a new tab. Return to this tab to keep your place in the lesson.
Lesson 8 of 8 · About 3 minutes
Use Atlas independently
By the end: Repeat the workflow for your own research and recover when you get stuck.
After this first session, you can use individual lessons as quick reference. Revisit the tool when your question, access, analysis plan or supervisor feedback changes.
1
Repeat the question-to-source workflow
Write the question, choose a route, inspect a profile, compare alternatives, read a source and update the worksheet. Choose 2. Practice examples in Training to try this process with a different project.
What you should have: You can repeat the process without following the guide line by line.
2
Recover from an unhelpful screen
If search returns nothing, clear the search, choose Show filters and Reset all filters, then try a shorter name or an alias. If a map label is hard to select, use the method list or Method library. If a comparison is full, remove an entry before adding another.
What you should have: You can distinguish an interface problem from a genuine gap in the match between your question and evidence.
3
Share an entry, not a hidden working session
Open the entry you want and copy the full browser address, using its permanent /methods/ address. Share /learn to open the Training page. A copied entry link does not include your finder answers, comparison selections or worksheet notes.
What you should have: A colleague can open the intended entry while your local notes remain in your browser.
A concrete example
For a seminar, share the learning-guide address and ask students to bring a question. For a focused supervision comment, share a specific method link and explain which assumption or limitation you want the student to examine.
Pause and explainWhat is the final sign that you are ready to use Atlas on your own?Reveal reasoning
You can find an entry, explain why it might fit, identify one reason it might not, follow an original source and state a concrete next action. Completing the lessons records your progress, not a formal qualification.
Watch for this: A catalogue is selective. If your specialised method or discipline is absent, use the closest concepts as a starting point and consult appropriate disciplinary literature.
These are fictional teaching scenarios, not reported study results or ready-to-run research protocols. Allow about 15 minutes for one. Entry links open in a new tab so you can keep this guide open. Open the named entries, then explain your reasoning before revealing the discussion point.
QUALITATIVE / TEACHING SCENARIO
Belonging at university
How do first-year commuter students describe belonging during their first semester?
A student has potential access to volunteers at one university, subject to approval. The interest is in experiences and meanings, not estimating how common each experience is across all universities.
Finder practice inputs
PurposeUnderstand meaning and experience
EvidenceText & talk
DisciplineEducation
TimeMedium
Inputs are for this scenario. Use your real constraints for your own project.
Use Find a method with the teaching inputs shown here. Read the reasons in the current results rather than expecting a fixed winning method.
Open Phenomenology and Qualitative case study in Method library. Add both to Compare and ask whether the focus is lived experience or a bounded institutional case.
Open Semi-structured interviews separately as a possible collection technique. Read In practice, including access and assumptions. A technique does not decide the design for you.
Read a source and complete a decision brief with your chosen focus, a feasibility issue and a limit on the claims.
If the central concern is a bounded support programme in its university context, a case study may be worth investigating. Define the case and its boundaries, and consider which evidence sources would illuminate it. If the concern is the meaning of a lived experience, investigate the relevant phenomenological tradition and its assumptions.
Change one thingThe student changes the question to “What proportion of commuter students feel they belong?” What should change?Reveal discussion
The purpose now involves describing a distribution. Reconsider the sampling, measures and evidence needed for a descriptive study. A few qualitative interviews cannot establish the proportion for a whole population.
QUANTITATIVE / TEACHING SCENARIO
Study time and assessment
What is the relationship between weekly study time and assessment scores in a defined student cohort?
A researcher is considering numerical questionnaire measures and permitted assessment records. The exercise concerns an observational relationship, not a demonstrated effect of extra study time.
Finder practice inputs
PurposeExplain a process or relationship
EvidenceNumbers
DisciplineEducation
TimeMedium
Inputs are for this scenario. Use your real constraints for your own project.
Use Method library to locate Cross-sectional survey and inspect its Overview and In practice tabs. Identify the population, timing and proposed measures.
Open OLS and multiple linear regression. Ask whether the outcome, data structure and model assumptions suit your question. Read its assumptions before proposing it.
Keep design and analysis decisions separate in the worksheet. A regression model is not a substitute for planning sampling, access and measurement.
Open the published sources and write a cautious conclusion template. Note plausible alternative explanations and avoid inventing results.
A survey design and a regression analysis may contribute to the same project, if justified. A statistical association alone does not show that study time causes a score change. Students may differ in prior knowledge, workload and other relevant characteristics; your proposed design and analysis need to address the claims you intend to make.
Change one thingA significant association is found. Can the researcher say that increasing study time will improve every student’s score?Reveal discussion
No. That would exceed an observational association and also make a universal individual claim. Reconsider the causal question and a suitable design, such as the designs discussed in Atlas’s causal entries, before making an effect claim.
MIXED METHODS / TEACHING SCENARIO
Explaining feedback experiences
What patterns appear in students’ ratings of feedback, and how do students explain the unexpected patterns?
An academic team could gather numerical ratings and interview accounts, subject to approval. They need to plan recruitment across phases and explain how the two strands inform each other.
Finder practice inputs
PurposeExplain a process or relationship
EvidenceText & talk + Numbers
DisciplineEducation
TimeExtended
Inputs are for this scenario. Use your real constraints for your own project.
Open Find a method and select both evidence types. Mixed methods requires access to both strands and a reason for combining them.
Compare Explanatory sequential and Convergent. Read the order and relationship of the strands in each design, then the planning and access requirements.
For an explanatory sequence, state how an unexpected numerical pattern would inform the next phase’s sampling and interview questions. Do not choose follow-up participants before you know what needs explaining.
Read the integration source linked in the profile. Write down where the strands connect and how you will handle accounts that complicate the numerical pattern.
An explanatory sequential approach may fit a numerical phase followed by qualitative work designed to explain it. A convergent approach involves a different relationship between the strands. Collecting a survey and interviews is not enough by itself: the project needs an explicit integration plan.
Change one thingThe survey and interviews seem to tell different stories. Should the team remove the inconvenient strand?Reveal discussion
No. Examine sampling, timing, measures and context, and consider what the difference reveals. Report and interpret the disagreement transparently rather than forcing the strands into apparent agreement.
FINANCE / TEACHING SCENARIO
Market response to an announcement
How did a defined set of listed firms’ returns differ from an expected-return benchmark around an announcement?
A finance student has potential access to adjusted daily prices, a market series and dated announcements. The exercise concerns a short event window and a justified benchmark, not a claim that any price change must have been caused by the announcement.
Finder practice inputs
PurposeExplain a process or relationship
EvidenceTime series
DisciplineBanking & finance
TimeMedium
Inputs are for this scenario. Use your real constraints for your own project.
Try the Finder inputs, then use Method library to inspect Event study even if it is absent from the six-item shortlist. The shortlist is selective, not an exhaustive search.
Read the Event study prerequisites. Specify the event date, an estimation window, an event window and the return benchmark before inspecting the event result.
Open CAPM as one benchmark model to investigate, and CRSP and WRDS as a data-access entry. These complement an event study rather than replace the design.
Check data adjustments, overlapping events, other news and inference assumptions. Record a claim boundary and a source still to read, without inventing returns or test results.
An event study may help investigate abnormal returns around a defined event. A benchmark supplies the expected-return comparison; it is not proof of the counterfactual. A time-window association needs careful interpretation, particularly when other events overlap.
Change one thingA major earnings release occurred in the same event window. Can the whole abnormal return be attributed to the announcement of interest?Reveal discussion
No. The competing news complicates attribution. Investigate event contamination and defensible design changes, and narrow the claim if the evidence cannot distinguish the announcements.
COMPUTING / TEACHING SCENARIO
Can students use the new submission interface?
Where do students encounter difficulties when completing a coursework submission in a prototype interface?
A computing project has a prototype and potential access to consenting volunteers, subject to approval. It needs observed interaction and participant accounts, rather than a sales forecast or a measure of learning gains. Use fictional submissions, not real coursework or credentials.
Finder practice inputs
PurposeEvaluate a programme, system or practice
EvidenceText & talk + Numbers
DisciplineComputer science
TimeShort
Inputs are for this scenario. Use your real constraints for your own project.
Try the Finder inputs. Inspect Usability testing, then describe realistic tasks, intended users and the prototype version.
Separate observed difficulties and task outcomes from participants’ explanations. Decide how facilitation, recording and participant welfare will be handled.
Compare Usability testing with Heuristic evaluation. The former observes participants attempting tasks; the latter uses expert inspection. Explain whether one or both address your evaluation question.
Inspect System Usability Scale as a possible supplementary measure. A questionnaire score does not replace observed task evidence. Read the sources and record an achievable next evaluation step.
A task-based usability evaluation can reveal interaction problems within a defined prototype and participant group. Expert inspection can contribute a complementary perspective. Neither by itself establishes that the interface improves academic attainment or represents every future user.
Change one thingThe prototype receives a high usability rating, but several participants cannot complete submission. Can the project be called successful on the rating alone?Reveal discussion
No. Investigate the task failures and the relationship between perceived usability and observed performance. Report both, revise the interface, and plan a further evaluation with an appropriate rationale.
Step 3 · Apply it to your own project
My research decision brief
Atlas of Research Methodologies · Paul Gallacher · 9 September 2026 www.paulgallacher.com/learn
Write short notes you can explain to a supervisor. This is a planning aid, not an assessed submission. Use fictional or non-identifying information. Notes remain in this browser; they are not sent to a tutor or shared with an account.
Who or what, which setting, and what kind of answer do you need?
Loading saved progress… Download a copy before using a different device or clearing browser data.
Teaching and supervision resources
A seminar you can run in 50 minutes.
Atlas of Research Methodologies · Paul Gallacher · 9 September 2026 www.paulgallacher.com/learn
Adapt the question to your discipline and level. Students need access to Atlas and a way to record notes. Use Method library if the map is unsuitable for the room, device or access needs. For offline teaching, distribute the printed booklet and entry readings you are permitted to share.
Without screens, give each pair the scenario, two permitted entry readings and a blank brief. Replace Finder and Compare clicks with a paper table of purpose, evidence, requirements and limitations.
Learning outcome: By the end, learners should be able to locate relevant entries, distinguish decision layers, justify a provisional choice, identify a limitation and name a source and next action.
Time
Activity
Evidence of learning
0 to 5 min
Present one fictional question. Ask what evidence would answer it.
Each learner writes a purpose and one access constraint.
5 to 12 min
Demonstrate Method library, one four-tab profile and its Sources tab.
Learners locate minimum data requirements and one limitation.
12 to 25 min
Pairs try a worked scenario and inspect two candidates.
Pairs identify whether entries are alternatives or complements.
25 to 35 min
Use Compare and challenge a preferred option.
Pairs explain one tradeoff and a condition that would change the choice.
35 to 45 min
Complete the worksheet and inspect a source. If full reading is not feasible, record it as a next action.
A provisional rationale distinguishes a source actually read from one still to read.
45 to 50 min
Share an exit statement: choice, reason, limitation, next action.
The tutor identifies unresolved assumptions to address next session.
Adapt by level
Undergraduate: Supply a bounded question and two candidate entries. Focus on naming the decision layer and one tradeoff.
Postgraduate: Ask learners to use their own question, challenge access assumptions and justify an alternative using literature.
Doctoral or staff development: Examine epistemological commitments, disciplinary conventions and what the atlas leaves unresolved.
Give feedback on the reasoning
Look for fit between question and evidence, a clear distinction between design and technique, an honest limitation, accurate use of a source, and an achievable next step.
If a learner says “the finder told me”, ask: “Which requirement did you check? What would make that suggestion unsuitable?”
After class, ask learners to read one original reference and revise their brief. Lesson completion is self-reported and is not a grade.
The planned relationship between qualitative and quantitative strands in mixed methods research.
Claim boundary
The limits of what the evidence and design allow you to conclude.
When something gets in the way
No search results
Clear the search, choose Show filters and Reset all filters, then try a shorter term. Header Search searches the full catalogue.
The finder will not continue
Choose an option. On Evidence, select at least one available evidence type.
The map is difficult to use
Choose Method library, the named method list or the small-screen layer cards. You do not need the 3D map to use the profiles.
I cannot add a fourth comparison
Compare holds up to three entries. Remove one first.
My comparison disappeared
Comparison selections and Finder answers save in this browser when storage is available. Check the saving message. A different device, blocked storage or cleared site data may explain missing work. Keep a downloaded brief.
A source is behind a paywall
Check your institutional library or an available author/repository version. Do not assume a summary is the full paper.
My notes are missing
Notes are local to the browser and device where you wrote them. Private browsing, clearing site data or changing devices can remove access. Use the downloaded brief.
Keyboard navigation
Use Tab to reach controls and Enter or Space to activate buttons. Use arrow keys in tab groups; Escape closes the quick guide and search dialogs. The Method library offers a text route to every entry.
Read beyond the guide
The instructions describe Atlas’s current controls. The examples are original teaching exercises. For methodological detail, start with the linked entries and their literature:
Published by Paul Gallacher · Guide edition 9 September 2026 · 214 entries · Six layers. Read. Try. Explain. Interface labels and source availability may change.