Research methods and data analysis procedures used by educational researchers
Abstract
To assess the status and the trends of subject matters investigated and research methods/designs and data analysis procedures employed by educational researchers, this study surveyed articles published by the American Educational Research Journal (AERJ), Journal of Experimental Education (JEE) and Journal of Educational Research (JER) from 1971 to 1998. Results of the study show that almost three quarters of subject matters in each journal focused on psychology in education; teachers; teaching/instruction; measurement/assessment; and methods of inquiry. Frequently used research methods were experimental research; descriptive research; correlational study; comparative approach; and survey. Descriptive statistics, ANOVA/ANCOVA, correlation, regression, t‐test, and psychometric statistics were frequently used data analysis procedures. There was a continuous drop of percentages of experimental quantitative research since the mid 1980s with a relative increase of non‐experimental qualitative research in AERJ and JER. Though some new data analysis procedures were introduced into educational research during the last decade, the trends of frequently used data analysis procedures stayed relatively steady. These trends were discussed in light of the changing editorial policies of the journals. Implications for the training of educational researchers were also noted.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Other classifications could be used; for example, Hsu (2005) included 30 different research methods/designs and 34 data analysis procedures.
“Other classifications could be used; for example, Hsu (2005) included in their review 30 different research methods/designs and 34 data analysis procedures.”
From Methodological Choices When Assessing Summer Bridge Programs in STEM Majors: A Scoping Review (2026) · cites this paper as Hsu (2005)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Methodological Choices When Assessing Summer Bridge Programs in STEM Majors: A Scoping Review
Caballero Díaz, D., Amin, A., Musa, P., & Leung, V. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16020220
- Authors
- Hsu, T.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hsu, Tse‐chi
- Venue
- International Journal of Research & Method in Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 109-133
- ISSN
- 1743-727X (ISSN-L)
- 1743-7288
- OpenAlex
- W2093870295
- Cited by
- 74
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 6.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Research & Method in Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Methods and Analysis
- Keywords
- data analysis methods, research trends, experimental study, editorial policy, educational research training
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review