ATLASResearch
methods
Research tools · Sources

Sources and reading.

Find a direct starting reference, see what role it plays, then inspect the full source list. A paper can be both a methods reference and the publication discussed in Worked study.

Read for the decision you need to make.

A methods reference explains an approach. A worked study illustrates an application. Reporting guidelines help describe a study transparently; they do not select its design. Documentation explains a tool or dataset. Conceptual and standards guidance address different responsibilities.

Source labels describe roles, not quality scores or full-text access. Comparison readings are identified in their notes. Read the original before citing a claim.

Reading layer
214 entries
01

Foundations: philosophy, ethics and quality

What assumptions, responsibilities and quality commitments shape the study?

Critical realismPhilosophy
Conceptual referenceCrotty (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process.

Distinguishes epistemology, theoretical perspective, methodology and methods.

Data protection and GDPRResearch practice
Ethics and standards guidanceInformation Commissioner's Office (n.d.). The research provisions.

UK regulator research guidance, under review following the Data (Use and Access) Act; check updates and institutional advice. Checked September 2026.

Methods referenceQuinn (2021). Research under the GDPR: a level playing field for public and private sector research? Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 17.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

InterpretivismPhilosophy
Conceptual referenceCrotty (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process.

Distinguishes epistemology, theoretical perspective, methodology and methods.

Member checkingResearch practice
Methods referenceNowell et al. (2017). Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16.

Demonstrates an auditable analytic decision trail and qualitative quality criteria.

Methods referenceBirt et al. (2016). Member Checking: A Tool to Enhance Trustworthiness or Merely a Nod to Validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26, 1802-1811.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Research ethics and governanceResearch practice
Ethics and standards guidanceBritish Psychological Society (2021). BPS Code of Human Research Ethics.

Official professional guidance on consent, harm, deception, debriefing and review.

Research with minorsResearch ethics
Ethics and standards guidanceBERA (2024). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. fifth edition.

Current association guidance on consent, participation, power and duty of care.

Writing and defending a methodology chapterResearch practice
Conceptual referenceCrotty (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process.

Distinguishes epistemology, theoretical perspective, methodology and methods.

Reporting guidelineO'Brien et al. (2014). Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research: A Synthesis of Recommendations. Academic Medicine, 89, 1245-1251.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

02

Research design

How will the enquiry work?

Ablation studiesEvaluation design
Worked studyVaswani et al. (2017). Attention Is All You Need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30.

Empirical application. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Action research in firmsResearch design
Methods referenceSchein (1995). Process consultation, action research and clinical inquiry: Are they the same? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 10, 14-19.

Distinguishes client-led consultation and clinical enquiry from formal research.

Methods referenceDavison, Martinsons and Kock (2004). Principles of canonical action research. Information Systems Journal, 14, 65-86.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Agent-based modellingResearch design
Reporting guidelineGrimm et al. (2006). A standard protocol for describing individual-based and agent-based models.

The ODD protocol makes agent rules and simulation scheduling inspectable.

Artefact evaluationEvaluation strategy
Methods referenceHevner, March, Park and Ram (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-106.

Foundational guidelines linking problem relevance, artefact construction and evaluation.

Consultancy-style enquiryResearch design
Methods referenceDavison, Martinsons and Kock (2004). Principles of canonical action research. Information Systems Journal, 14, 65-86.

Sets out five principles linking client agreements, iterative change and scholarly learning.

Methods referenceSchein (1995). Process consultation, action research and clinical inquiry: Are they the same? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 10, 14-19.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Controlled experiments in software engineeringResearch design
Methods referenceWohlin, Runeson, Höst, Ohlsson, Regnell and Wesslén (2012). Experimentation in Software Engineering. 1st edition. Springer.

Design, execute and interpret controlled software engineering experiments.

CounterbalancingDesign feature
Reporting guidelineDwan, Li, Altman and Elbourne (2019). CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised crossover trials. BMJ, 366, l4378.

Worked reporting guidance on sequences, periods and carryover.

Cross-sectional surveyStudy design
Methods referenceGroves, Fowler, Couper, Lepkowski, Singer and Tourangeau (2009). Survey Methodology. 2nd edition. Wiley.

A general survey methods text. Use a relevant reporting guideline, such as STROBE, alongside methodological planning.

Design science researchResearch design
Methods referenceHevner, March, Park and Ram (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-106.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Design-based researchResearch design
Methods referenceThe Design-Based Research Collective (2003). Design-Based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry.

Explains the relationship between educational theory, iterative design and classroom evidence.

Difference-in-differencesResearch design
Methods referenceCallaway and Sant’Anna (2021). Difference-in-Differences with multiple time periods.

Treatment-timing heterogeneity, group-time effects and appropriate comparison groups.

Embedded mixed methodsResearch design
Evaluative designResearch design
Methods referenceCraig et al. (2008). Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance.

The earlier framework, useful for understanding the development of intervention evaluation.

Explanatory sequentialIntegrated design
Methods referenceFetters, Curry and Creswell (2013). Achieving Integration in Mixed Methods Designs: Principles and Practices.

Core designs and integration through connecting, building, merging, and embedding.

Exploratory sequentialIntegrated design
Methods referenceFetters, Curry and Creswell (2013). Achieving Integration in Mixed Methods Designs: Principles and Practices.

Core designs and integration through connecting, building, merging, and embedding.

Factorial designsResearch design
Methods referenceMurre (2021). The Godden and Baddeley (1975) experiment on context-dependent memory on land and underwater: a replication.

A later test that helps separate the design lesson from certainty about a classic result.

Lesson studyCollaborative research design
Methods referenceDudley (2011). Lesson Study: a handbook.

A practical guide to planning, observing and reviewing a research lesson. This is the dated 2011 handbook, not a claim to be the latest edition.

Longitudinal firm panelsResearch design
Worked studyBloom and Van Reenen (2007). Measuring and Explaining Management Practices Across Firms and Countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122, 1351-1408.

A management survey with structured scoring, open interviewing and links to firm performance.

Organisational case studyResearch design
Methods referenceEisenhardt and Graebner (2007). Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 25-32.

Explains theoretical case selection and evidence presentation in management research.

Worked studyEisenhardt (1989). Making Fast Strategic Decisions in High-Velocity Environments. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 543-576.

Empirical application. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Organisational ethnographyResearch design
Methods referenceHammersley and Atkinson (2019). Ethnography: Principles in Practice. 4th edition.

A general ethnography methods text. The Barley paper shows an organisational application.

Pre-test and post-test learning evaluationResearch design
Methods referenceMorris (2008). Estimating Effect Sizes From Pretest-Posttest-Control Group Designs.

Simulation comparison of standardised change estimates and their uncertainty.

Qualitative case studyResearch design
Qualitative comparative analysis and fsQCAResearch design and analysis
Methods referenceRagin (2006). Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency and Coverage. Political Analysis, 14, 291-310.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Simulation studiesResearch design
Methods referenceMorris, White and Crowther (2019). Using simulation studies to evaluate statistical methods. Statistics in Medicine, 38, 2074-2102.

A guide to designing and reporting simulations that evaluate statistical methods. Sargent addresses simulation-model verification and validation.

Methods referenceSargent (2010). Verification and Validation of Simulation Models. Winter Simulation Conference.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Single and multiple case study: Stake traditionResearch design
Methods referenceBaxter and Jack (2008). Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13, 544-559.

Explains case boundaries, propositions, multiple sources and practical design choices.

Methods referenceYazan (2015). Three Approaches to Case Study Methods in Education: Yin, Merriam, and Stake. The Qualitative Report, 20, 134-152.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Single and multiple case study: Yin traditionResearch design
Methods referenceYazan (2015). Three Approaches to Case Study Methods in Education: Yin, Merriam, and Stake. The Qualitative Report, 20, 134-152.

Directly compares philosophical commitments and procedures across case study traditions.

Survey research at scaleResearch design
Methods referenceGroves, Fowler, Couper, Lepkowski, Singer and Tourangeau (2009). Survey Methodology. 2nd edition. Wiley.

A general survey methods text covering sampling, questionnaire development, nonresponse and survey error.

Within-subjects and repeated-measures designsResearch design
Reporting guidelineDwan, Li, Altman and Elbourne (2019). CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised crossover trials. BMJ, 366, l4378.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

03

Review and synthesis

What does existing evidence tell us?

Kitchenham review protocolReview protocol
Methods referenceKitchenham and Charters (2007). Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering. version 2.3.

The software-engineering systematic review protocol. PRISMA is complementary reporting guidance, not a substitute for this protocol.

Meta-analysisReview & synthesis
Methods referenceGlass (1976). Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research. Educational Researcher, 5(10), 3-8.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Rapid reviewReview & synthesis
Reporting guidelinePage et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.

Reporting guidance, not a replacement for a review protocol or conduct manual.

Realist synthesisReview & synthesis
04

Sampling and measurement

Who, what and how much?

Implicit measuresMeasurement
Methods referenceGreenwald, Nosek and Banaji (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm.

Explains scoring choices, error treatment and standardisation of latency differences.

Likert designMeasurement
Methods referenceSullivan and Artino (2013). Analyzing and Interpreting Data From Likert-Type Scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5, 541-542.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Psychological assessment and psychometricsMeasurement
Methods referenceBorsboom (2006). The attack of the psychometricians. Psychometrika, 71, 425-440.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Simple random samplingSampling
Methods referenceVitter (1985). Random sampling with a reservoir. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 11, 37-57.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

System Usability ScaleMeasurement
Train, validation and test splitsSampling and evaluation
Research auditKapoor and Narayanan (2023). Leakage and the reproducibility crisis in machine-learning-based science. Patterns, 4, 100804.

Research audit. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

05

Data collection

Where will the evidence come from?

Administrative data linkageData collection
Methods referenceChetty, Friedman and Rockoff (2014). Measuring the Impacts of Teachers I: Evaluating Bias in Teacher Value-Added Estimates.

Companion methodological application investigating bias in observational teacher estimates.

Archival researchData collection
Methods referenceBowen (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9, 27-40.

Practical guidance on selecting, appraising and interpreting documents.

Classroom observation protocolsData collection
Software or data documentationUniversity of British Columbia (n.d.). Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM.

Protocol materials and intended uses from the developing programme.

Secondary data analysisData collection
Methods referenceChetty, Friedman and Rockoff (2014). Measuring the Impacts of Teachers I: Evaluating Bias in Teacher Value-Added Estimates.

Companion methodological application investigating bias in observational teacher estimates.

Methods referenceGolder and Macy (2014). Digital Footprints: Opportunities and Challenges for Online Social Research. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 129-152.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Semi-structured interviewsData collection
Methods referencePotter and Hepburn (2005). Qualitative interviews in psychology: problems and possibilities. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 281-307.

Explains why interviewer contributions and the interview situation matter analytically.

Structured interviewsData collection
Methods referenceGroves, Fowler, Couper, Lepkowski, Singer and Tourangeau (2009). Survey Methodology. 2nd edition. Wiley.

Methods guidance on standardised survey questions, interviewing and survey error. The worked paper examines employment selection interviews specifically.

Research auditCampion, Palmer and Campion (1997). A review of structure in the selection interview. Personnel Psychology, 50, 655-702.

Research audit. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Student voice methodsParticipatory data collection
Ethics and standards guidanceBERA (2024). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. fifth edition.

Current association guidance on consent, participation, power and duty of care.

Think-aloud protocolsData collection
Methods referenceHertzum (2024). Concurrent or Retrospective Thinking Aloud in Usability Tests.

Evidence review of trade-offs between concurrent and retrospective verbalisation.

Usability testingData collection
Methods referenceMoran (2019). Usability (User) Testing 101. Nielsen Norman Group.

Practical guidance on observing participants as they attempt realistic tasks. Heuristic inspection is a different evaluation method.

Worked studyBruun and Stage (2015). An Empirical Study of the Effects of Three Think-Aloud Protocols on Identification of Usability Problems. Human-Computer Interaction: INTERACT 2015.

A study comparing think-aloud protocols during usability tests. It is an empirical methods comparison, not a complete usability-testing handbook.

Vignette and scenario experimentsData collection
Methods referenceAtzmüller and Steiner (2010). Experimental Vignette Studies in Survey Research.

Design and analysis choices for experimental vignette surveys.

Web scrapingData collection
Methods referenceGolder and Macy (2014). Digital Footprints: Opportunities and Challenges for Online Social Research. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 129-152.

Reviews opportunities and selection and interpretation problems in digital trace data.

06

Analysis

How does evidence become an answer?

Classification metricsMeasurement and analysis
Cluster analysisAnalysis
Content analysisAnalysis
Methods referenceO'Connor and Joffe (2020). Intercoder Reliability in Qualitative Research: Debates and Practical Guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19.

Discusses when agreement assessment fits an approach and how to conduct it transparently.

Methods referenceHsieh and Shannon (2005). Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277-1288.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Curriculum and policy document analysisAnalysis
Methods referenceBowen (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9, 27-40.

Methods guidance on analysing documents. Ball provides the policy-specific conceptual discussion in Worked study.

Data envelopment analysisAnalysis
Methods referenceBanker, Charnes and Cooper (1984). Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.

Variable returns to scale and the distinction between technical and scale efficiency.

Methods referenceCharnes, Cooper and Rhodes (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Discriminant analysisAnalysis
Effect sizes and confidence intervalsAnalysis
Hyperparameter searchModel selection
Methods referenceBergstra and Bengio (2012). Random Search for Hyper-Parameter Optimization. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 13, 281-305.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Interpretative phenomenological analysisAnalysis
Learning analyticsAnalysis
Methods referencePrinsloo and Slade (2016). Student Vulnerability, Agency and Learning Analytics: An Exploration.

Student agency and ethical obligations when analysing educational traces.

Mediation analysisAnalysis
OLS and multiple linear regressionAnalysis
Methods referenceBewick, Cheek and Ball (2003). Statistics review 7: Correlation and regression. Critical Care, 7, 451-459.

Worked bivariate relationships and diagnostic cautions.

Structural equation modellingAnalysis
Methods referenceBrown (2015). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. 2nd edition. Guilford Press.

A dedicated text on confirmatory measurement models, an important part of many SEM analyses. The lavaan paper provides implementation examples.

Methods referenceRosseel (2012). lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36.

Methodological worked paper. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

t-testsAnalysis
Text miningAnalysis
Methods referenceGrimmer and Stewart (2013). Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts. Political Analysis, 21(3), 267-297.

A methods overview of automated text analysis, with emphasis on validation and the limits of automated measurement.

Worked studyPang, Lee and Vaithyanathan (2002). Thumbs up? Sentiment Classification using Machine Learning Techniques. EMNLP, 79-86.

Empirical application. Read the Worked study tab for Atlas’s explanation.

Unit-root and stationarity testsAnalysis
Methods referenceDickey and Fuller (1981). Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root.

Unit-root inference with fitted deterministic components and autoregressive dynamics.