A note on research methodology: for Housing Studies students

 A note on research methodology: for Housing Studies students

 

Regarding the subject of Research Methods in Housing Studies, what topics should be considered key topics and what topics considered as minor topics on describing a research methodology (as a theoretical blueprint)? Here are the topics I can think of for this discussion purpose: research objectives, research questions, research philosophy, research approach (methods) types (i.e. qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods), research approach (reasoning) types (i.e. inductive, deductive, abductive), researcher positionality, primary research methods, secondary research methods, research methods design criteria, research ethics consideration, research constraint.

 

Based on established research methodology frameworks (particularly Saunders’ “Research Onion”) and housing studies literature, your list covers most essential elements. Below is a structured classification into key topics (core, must-have components of a methodological blueprint) and minor topics (important but often treated as sub-components or contextual considerations).

Key topics (core methodological blueprint)

These form the logical spine of any research methodology chapter or proposal in Housing Studies:

• Research philosophy
  Ontology and epistemology (e.g., positivism, interpretivism, pragmatism, critical realism). This is the outermost and most foundational layer—it justifies every subsequent design choice.
• Research approach (reasoning): inductive, deductive, abductive
  How theory and data relate. This sits directly under philosophy in the Research Onion and determines whether you test theory, build theory, or iterate between both.
• Research approach (methods): qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods
  The methodological choice that flows from philosophy and reasoning. Housing studies increasingly endorse mixed-methods designs to capture both structural patterns and lived experiences.
• Research objectives and research questions
  The problem-driven starting point. In social science (including housing), inquiries are “problem-driven” rather than “method-driven”; objectives/questions anchor the design and justify alignment across layers.
• Research strategy / design type
  The coherent plan linking philosophy to data: e.g., surveys, case studies, field studies, participatory action research, evaluation research, modelling/mapping, textual/narrative studies. Housing research typologies identify 11+ prototype designs, so naming and justifying your strategy is central.
• Primary research methods (data collection techniques)
  Specific instruments and procedures: questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, observations, document analysis, experiments, etc. This is the innermost “techniques and procedures” layer of the Onion.
• Research ethics consideration
  Especially critical in housing studies involving human participants, vulnerable groups, or policy-sensitive data. Ethics shapes access, consent, confidentiality, and risk mitigation.

Minor topics (important but often secondary or embedded)

These are still necessary in a full methodology, but they typically support or elaborate the key topics rather than standing as independent pillars:

• Researcher positionality
  Reflexivity about the researcher’s values, social position, and relationship to participants. Increasingly expected in qualitative and participatory housing research, but often embedded within philosophy/ethics or the methods section.
• Secondary research methods
  Use of existing data (e.g., census, administrative records, policy documents, prior surveys). Important in housing policy/market analysis, but usually treated as part of data sources within the “techniques and procedures” layer.
• Research methods design criteria
  Quality/rigour criteria (e.g., validity, reliability, trustworthiness, transferability, triangulation). These are evaluative standards applied across the design rather than a standalone design element.
• Research constraints (limitations)
  Practical, temporal, access, or resource limits. Typically addressed in a limitations subsection rather than as a core design layer.

How this maps to a “theoretical blueprint”

A clean way to present this in teaching or dissertation supervision is:

1.    Foundation layer: Philosophy → Reasoning (inductive/deductive/abductive)

2.    Design layer: Objectives/Questions → Methodological choice (qual/quant/mixed) → Strategy (case study, survey, PAR, etc.) → Time horizon (cross-sectional/longitudinal)

3.    Operational layer: Primary/secondary methods → Sampling → Data collection & analysis procedures

4.    Governance layer: Ethics, positionality, design criteria, constraints

This mirrors the Research Onion while making explicit the housing-studies emphasis on problem-driven design and diverse strategies (e.g., participatory, evaluation, mixed-income housing studies).

 

What are the layers of the onion model of Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2023), from the top layer to the bottom layer?

In Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill’s (2023, 9th ed.) Research Onion, the six layers from the outermost (top) to the innermost (bottom) are:

1.                                                                Research philosophy
Ontology, epistemology, axiology (e.g., positivism, interpretivism, pragmatism, critical realism, postmodernism).

2.                                                                Approach to theory development
Deductive, inductive, abductive (and, in some discussions, retroductive) reasoning.

3.                                                                Methodological choice
Quantitative, qualitative, mixed/multiple methods; often linked to research purposes (exploratory, descriptive, explanatory, evaluative).

4.                                                                Research strategy(ies)
The overall design: survey, experiment, case study, ethnography, grounded theory, narrative inquiry, action research, archival research, etc.

5.                                                                Time horizon
Cross-sectional (single point in time) or longitudinal (over time).

6.                                                                Procedures and techniques
Data access, sampling, data collection methods (interviews, questionnaires, observation, documents), and data analysis techniques (statistical, thematic, etc.).

This ordering reflects the logic that outer layers (philosophy and theory approach) constrain and justify inner design choices, down to the concrete techniques at the centre.

Provide 3 academic references on the topic discussed here in Harvard reference format.

Here are three academic references, in Harvard style, that directly support the discussion on coherent research methodology formulation (alignment, methodological coherence, and mixed-methods integration):

·        Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L. (2018) Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

·        Fetters, M.D., Curry, L.A. and Creswell, J.W. (2013) ‘Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—principles and practices’, Health Services Research, 48(6), pp. 2134–2156. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12117.

·        Saunders, M.N.K., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2023) Research methods for business students. 9th ed. Harlow: Pearson.

These sources collectively cover: the Research Onion and philosophy–design alignment (Saunders et al., 2023), principles for integrating qualitative and quantitative components to ensure coherence (Fetters et al., 2013), and practical guidance on designing coherent mixed-methods studies (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2018).