Beyond the known: analysing complexities of novice researchers in identifying and filling research gaps in social science scholarship

Abstract

Identifying research gaps is a key aspect of scholarly excellence, yet it remains a challenge for many novice researchers. Despite the emphasis on innovation in academia, early-career scholars often struggle to differentiate genuine gaps from mere absences in the literature. This study examines these difficulties within social science research, exploring structural and institutional factors that shape the research journey. Using a qualitative, non-empirical approach, the study employs a systematic literature review and critical discourse analysis to synthesize scholarly arguments. Data were sourced from reputable databases, ensuring credibility through strict inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis identified key challenges, including difficulties in recognizing gaps, theoretical conceptualization, methodological rigor, and institutional constraints such as rigid paradigms, limited mentorship, and lack of interdisciplinary collaboration. Triangulation enhanced validity by evaluating sources across disciplines. Findings reveal that inadequate exposure to academic discourse, weak theoretical grounding, and insufficient methodological training hinder gap identification. The study underscores the need for structured mentorship, enhanced training, and critical engagement with theory to support emerging scholars. Addressing these barriers contributes to research capacity building in social sciences, highlighting the importance of fostering innovative and impactful academic contributions.

Keywords: {'name': 'Novice Researcher, Social Science, Scholarship. Research Capacity, Gap Identification, Methodological Training'}

Authors & affiliations

Radiakga Thabang Molokomme
Affiliation not supplied

Deposited references

Supplied references, not a list of publications citing this article.

DOI: 10.4324/9781003209300

DOI: 10.1111/jan.12888

DOI: 10.4324/9780203732359-17

DOI: 10.1108/JOCM-05-2019-0130

DOI: 10.5465/amr.2009.0188

DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198787099.001.0001

Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1, pp. 141-154). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

DOI: 10.1177/0305829816651934

DOI: 10.1108/IJOPM-03-2015-0119

Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.

C Z-Roberts, R. D., Zeidner, M., & Matthews, G. (2001). Does emotional intelligence? 3.

DOI: 10.3390/publications3020104

DOI: 10.1145/3185515

DOI: 10.1016/j.jwb.2021.101194

DOI: 10.1177/2050312118822927

DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139016179

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.

Davis, B. H., & Resta, V. K. (2002). Online collaboration: Supporting novice teachers as researchers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(1), 101-117. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/9305/

DOI: 10.15406/jabb.2023.10.00319

DOI: 10.1002/joe.22245

DOI: 10.5465/annals.2016.0051

Fellows, R. F., & Liu, A. M. (2021). Research methods for construction. John Wiley & Sons.

Frost, N. (2021). Qualitative research methods in psychology: Combining core approaches (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.

DOI: 10.1037/amp0000319

Hart, C. (2018). Doing a literature review: Releasing the research imagination.

DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.190

Huiberts, E. (2016). Building bridges, filling gaps: Toward an integrative interdisciplinary and mixed method approach for future audience research in relation to the mediation of distant suffering. International Journal of Communication, 10, 21.

Hyland, K. (2016). Academic publishing: Issues and challenges in the construction of knowledge.

DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2019.1328

DOI: 10.1080/15427587.2017.1290500

Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press.

DOI: 10.31181/sems31202535k

Lindberg, J. (2022). Female risk-assessment and career path: A qualitative study of the role of risk, ontological security, and immanence in law students’ future occupational choices.

DOI: 10.1187/cbe.21-05-0134

Makuyana, T., Nhamo, G., & Dube, K. (2023). The Great OR Tambo International Airport Flood: Dealing with the harsh realities of climate-induced extreme weather events. https://doi.org/10.46222/ajhtl.19770720.464

May, T., & Perry, B. (2022). Social research: Issues, methods and process. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i5.6639

DOI: 10.3102/978-0-935302-48-6_5

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-65735-1_1

DOI: 10.30935/cedtech/11145

Papaioannou, D., Sutton, A., & Booth, A. (2016). Systematic approaches to a successful literature review (pp. 1-336).

Patil, D. D., & Wagh, B. D. (2023). Research methodologies in multidisciplinary subjects (Volume-1). Academic Guru Publishing House.

Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of intelligence. Littlefield Adams.

DOI: 10.1063/1.3060577

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-49672-2

DOI: 10.4324/9781003075158

DOI: 10.1007/s11625-018-0639-1

Salganik, M. J. (2019). Bit by bit: Social research in the digital age. Princeton University Press.

DOI: 10.1007/s10639-021-10444-z

DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

DOI: 10.4135/9781526405555.n2

DOI: 10.3390/systems7010004

DOI: 10.1177/1094428115610808

Williams, S. (2024). Bridging the gap: Understanding challenges faced by novice educators in the practical teaching phase. European International Journal of Philological Sciences, 4(04), 1-7. https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/eijps/article/view/34092

DOI: 10.5688/ajpe8906

DOI: 10.47067/ramss.v4i2.142