The Important Role of Stating Research Limitations

No researcher is perfect, and no research project can be perfectly conducted. Every study has its limitations, particularly those related to the data and methods used. Unfortunately, many researchers are afraid and embarrassed to articulate these limitations. Researchers who effectively state the limitations of their data can help inform audiences about the reliability of their findings and conclusions. Presenting limitations effectively is an excellent way to communicate the credibility of the research to readers.

Why is it important to state the limitations of the study?

There are several reasons why stating the limitations of the research is important:

1. Preventing Criticism. Comprehensively and explicitly stating the limitations of the research can reduce the risk of future external findings, thereby maintaining the researcher’s credibility.
2. Promoting Reader Understanding. When researchers explain the limitations of their research, they demonstrate a clear understanding of the research objectives, leaving a positive impression with journal editors, peer reviewers, and readers, and highlighting the researcher’s expertise in the research area.
3. Suggesting Improvements. Describing the limitations of the research demonstrates the researcher’s openness to suggestions for improvement, improving the research design for stronger findings, and advancing the field of research.

Therefore, never hesitate to state the limitations of the research, because this can improve the quality of the research as well as increase the credibility of the researcher.

Important Points When Stating Research Limitations

There are four important points when stating research limitations.

1. Clearly identify the types of limitations. Clearly state the limitations of the research and identify the sources of those limitations. Generally, limitations can arise from the research design, sampling techniques, data collection, data analysis, and interpretation.
   • Limitations related to the research design. For example, due to the pandemic, interviews had to be conducted online. The researchers acknowledged this was a weakness, as face-to-face interviews should have been used.
   • Limitations related to sampling techniques. For example, due to inadequate infrastructure in rural areas, the sample to explore public satisfaction with the quality of government services focused only on urban areas. This is a recognized weakness, as it ignores valuable insights from rural populations, who may offer different perspectives on the phenomenon under study.
   • Limitations related to data collection. For example, researchers may want to explore the psychological impact of sexual harassment victims, but only a small number of victims are willing to be interviewed, and there is no guarantee that those who do agree will provide honest information. The researchers must acknowledge that the data collected (whatever they can) is weak.
   • Limitations related to data analysis. For example, a researcher might want to explore exchange rate volatility during a crisis. This data tends to be extremely extreme and cannot be treated with any method, while data analysis software requires normal data. The researcher has no choice but to rely on the data as it is and ignore the software’s requirements. Therefore, the researcher must acknowledge that the analysis results are weak due to the potential for bias.
   • Limitations related to research findings. For example, researchers may find that sexual harassment has a significant psychological impact on victims, but due to data limitations, they are unable to explain the long-term impact. Therefore, researchers should clearly state this so that other researchers can help develop their research in the future.
2. Explain the Impact of Limitations on the Research Results. An explanation of limitations explains their impact on the findings, demonstrates scientific rigor, and reveals broader implications. For example, researchers used vehicle counts and passenger capacity as indirect indicators of road user numbers on Beijing’s national highways. This could have resulted in an overestimation of nearly 20–40%. This implies that more people may have stayed home during the holidays than the research results indicate.
3. Details of Efforts to Minimize Impact. Explain what efforts the researcher has made to mitigate the limitations of the study. For example, to ensure that the information provided by victims of sexual harassment is honest, the researcher conducted three repeat interviews. However, the researcher must acknowledge that this effort is still weak, due to the small number of victims of sexual harassment willing to be interviewed, and for those who are willing, there is no guarantee that they will be honest. It is possible that even though the interviews were repeated three times, they consistently provided dishonest information.
4. Suggest Future Avoidance Strategies. Suggest ways to avoid these limitations in future research. As mentioned previously, stating the limitations of a study can be a valuable contribution to the field and accelerate its development. For example, the study results showed inaccuracy in medium-range LIDAR at an altitude of 1000 m. Therefore, it is recommended that future research use medium-range LIDAR at an altitude of 800 m or lower to improve accuracy.

Conclusion

Researchers may hesitate to discuss the limitations of their research when writing a manuscript, fearing it will hinder the chances of journal acceptance or assuming that reviewers and editors will address this aspect. However, this assumption is deeply flawed. Clearly stating limitations increases the chances of your manuscript being published and builds professional credibility in the long run.