The research question is the core of your academic work. It defines what you actually want to investigate, structures your argumentation, and determines which methods are appropriate. At the same time, it is closely linked to the so-called research gap: without a clear gap, your work can easily become “interchangeable” because it is not clear what contribution you are making to the existing literature. This text is about how to get from a broad topic to a viable research question—and how to justify it in the context of a research gap.
1. Topic, Research Problem, Research Question, Objective
Often, all you have at the beginning is a topic: “Digital platforms in public administration,” “Use of AI tools by students,” “Acceptance of self-service BI in companies.” However, a topic alone is not enough to plan a scientific paper. You need a clearly formulated research question, an outlined research problem, and a specific objective.
The research problem describes in a few sentences which content-related problem or open question interests you. It is more narrative and can be formulated in an application-oriented way: Where do you observe difficulties, inconsistencies, or open issues in practice and research?
The research question is the precise, empirically or conceptually answerable question that is at the heart of your work. It should be formulated in such a way that it can be meaningfully pursued within the available time, data, and methods. It is often helpful to formulate it as a W question (what, how, why).
The objective describes what your work should achieve – typically in terms of a contribution to literature and/or practice. It links the research problem, research gap, and research question and makes it clear why it is worth pursuing.
A simple example:
- Topic: “Self-service BI in medium-sized companies.”
- Research problem: Many companies invest in self-service BI solutions but do not achieve the desired usage in their departments.
- Research question: “How do organizational conditions influence the actual use of self-service BI tools in medium-sized companies?”
- Objective: The work should identify key influencing factors and thus highlight starting points for the successful introduction of self-service BI.
2. What is a research gap?
A research gap describes what has not been addressed or has been addressed insufficiently in the existing literature. It is important to note that a research gap is not a “blank slate,” but rather results from a systematic examination of existing work.
In practice, various types of gaps have become established:
- Context gap: A phenomenon has been studied primarily in certain contexts (e.g., large companies, certain countries), while other contexts are underrepresented.
- Methodological gap: There are many quantitative studies, but hardly any qualitative insights—or vice versa.
Conflicting findings: Studies come to different conclusions that have not yet been well explained. - Theoretical gap: Certain theories have not yet been systematically applied in a field.
- New phenomena: Practically relevant developments (e.g., new technologies) have not yet been extensively studied in the literature.
A well-formulated gap clarifies where previous work has failed or what it has omitted, without devaluing earlier research. The gap should reveal why it makes sense and is feasible to address your specific question.
3. How do you find a research gap?
The basis for a research gap is always a structured overview of the current state of research. A systematic approach will help you with this:
- Start with review articles
First, search for review articles or meta-analyses on your topic, for example in journals on business informatics or related disciplines. These typically discuss research desiderata and open questions. - Search specifically for current individual studies
Supplement reviews with more recent empirical work that specifically addresses your topic. Pay particular attention to the “Limitations” and “Future Research” sections, as authors often explicitly identify research gaps there. - Take notes on gaps
As you read, note which aspects are repeatedly described as “under-researched,” where results diverge, or which contexts have been left out so far. These notes will form the basis of your gap analysis later on. - Categorize the gap
Assign your observations to one or more gap types. This will allow you to clarify later whether you are addressing a new context, a new method, or a theoretical perspective, for example.
By documenting this process, you create a comprehensible basis for justifying your research question in the text.
4. From topic to research question
Many students start with a broad area of interest and wonder how to arrive at a specific research question. A simple approach consists of four steps:
- Narrow down the topic
Reduce your topic to a clearly defined area. Instead of “digitalization in healthcare,” try “use of patient portals in urban hospitals.” - Identify key concepts
Consider which core concepts play a role in your topic area (e.g., intended use, perceived usefulness, organizational support) and search specifically for literature on these topics. - Examine relationships between concepts
Ask yourself which connections have already been described in the literature and where there are still open questions. This is where the first idea for your research question emerges. - Formulate and refine your research question
Draft a first version of your question and check it against criteria such as clarity, feasibility, and connection to the literature. Often, several iterations are necessary until the question is truly tailored to your needs.
For example, the topic “Use of collaboration platforms in higher education” can be transformed through this process into a research question such as: “How do perceived autonomy support and social presence influence the continued use of collaboration platforms in master's programs in business informatics?”
5. Formulation aids for research gaps and research questions
When formulating research gaps and research questions, standardized sentence templates that you can adapt to your topic will help you.
Typical “gap” formulations in German:
- „Bisherige Studien konzentrieren sich vor allem auf …, während der Kontext … bislang kaum berücksichtigt wurde.“
- „Obwohl zahlreiche Arbeiten den Einfluss von … untersucht haben, ist bislang wenig darüber bekannt, wie …“
- „In der bestehenden Literatur finden sich unterschiedliche Ergebnisse zur Rolle von …, sodass offen bleibt, …“
Corresponding formulations in English:
- “While prior research has extensively examined X, little is known about Y in the context of Z.”
- “Existing studies report conflicting findings regarding ..., which raises the question of ...”
- “Although numerous studies have addressed ..., the role of ... remains underexplored.”
Clear questions are suitable for the research question itself:
- „Wie beeinflusst … die …?“
- „Welche Faktoren tragen dazu bei, dass …?“
- „Inwieweit unterscheidet sich … zwischen … und …?“
In English:
- “How does X influence Y in the context of Z?”
- “What factors contribute to ...?”
- “To what extent does ... differ across ...?”
It is important that the question fits your planned methodological approach not only linguistically, but also in terms of content.
6. Common Mistakes and a Brief Checklist
In practice, similar mistakes are repeatedly encountered in research questions and gaps:
- The question is too broad (“How does digitalization affect companies?”).
- The question is too vague (“What impact does technology have?”).
- The question does not fit the available method or database.
- The research gap is asserted rather than proven because the literature has not been systematically reviewed.
- No clear connection is made between the gap, the question, and the objective.
A short checklist can help you avoid these mistakes:
- Is the research gap visibly supported by literature in the text?
- Is the research question clear and expressed in a W-formulation?
- Can I provide a meaningful answer with my methods and resources?
- When reading, can third parties (supervisors, fellow students) recognize the specific contribution of the work?
- Are the problem, gap, question, and objective logically related to each other?
If you can answer most of these questions with “yes,” you are a big step closer to a viable research question.
7. Research Questions in Typical Methodological Settings in Information Systems
Certain methodological settings occur particularly frequently in Information Systems, such as surveys, qualitative case studies, experiments, and design-oriented research (design science). Each of these approaches suggests how a research question can be tailored. It is crucial that the question and method are compatible and that the research gap reveals why this particular setting was chosen.
7.1 Survey Studies
Survey studies are suitable when relationships between constructs are to be examined quantitatively or differences between groups are to be analyzed. The research question is then often focused on correlations (“How is X related to Y?”) or differences (“Do groups A and B differ with regard to X?”).
Examples:
- “How do perceived usefulness and subjective norms influence the intention to use self-service BI tools in medium-sized companies?”
- “To what extent do students from different disciplines differ in their willingness to use AI-based writing tools for academic work?”
In these examples, it is clear that variables can be quantified and statistically evaluated. The research question is formulated in such a way that a questionnaire with appropriate scales can be used to answer it.
7.2 Qualitative Case Studies
Qualitative case studies are suitable when processes, meanings, and contexts are the main focus, for example, when introducing new systems, designing transformation processes, or using innovative technologies in specific organizations. The research questions here are often descriptive or explanatory in nature, without testing fixed hypotheses in advance.
Examples:
- “How does the introduction of a central data analysis ecosystem in a public administration shape organizational routines and decision-making processes?”
- “How do employees in a hospital experience the introduction of a mobile documentation system in their everyday nursing work?”
The focus in each case is on the “how”: processes, perceptions, and interpretations are examined in the organizational context. The method (e.g., guided interviews, observations, document analysis) is suitable for providing detailed insights into these processes.
7.3 Experiments
Experiments are used when cause-and-effect relationships need to be tested under controlled conditions. In business informatics, for example, the focus is on how different design variants of user interfaces, dashboards, or recommendation systems influence user behavior.
Examples:
- “How does the presentation of data protection information (compact vs. detailed) affect the willingness to use a health app?”
- “What influence does the visualization of uncertainty in forecast dashboards have on the quality of decisions made by managers?”
The research questions are formulated in such a way that it is clear which independent and dependent variables are being considered and which behavior or assessment is to be measured. A research gap may arise here, for example, if certain forms of presentation or user groups have not yet been experimentally investigated.
7.4 Design Science Research
Design science research focuses on the development and evaluation of artifacts such as methods, models, prototypes, or decision support systems. The research questions often relate to which design principles contribute to solving a specific problem or how an artifact works in a given context.
Examples:
- “How can a decision support system be designed that helps project managers in public IT projects prioritize risks?”
- “Which design principles contribute to increasing the transparency of AI-supported recommendation systems for end users?”
Such questions make it clear that an artifact should be developed and evaluated in a suitable context. The research gap here often lies in the fact that existing approaches do not yet address certain requirements or are only described for other contexts.
7.5 Mixed-method Approaches
Mixed-method studies combine qualitative and quantitative approaches to examine a phenomenon from different perspectives. Research questions can, for example, be initially exploratory (qualitative) and then evaluative (quantitative).
Example:
- “How do employees describe the introduction of a new collaboration tool in everyday project work, and to what extent can the resulting influencing factors on usage intention be quantitatively confirmed?”
In such a setting, the research gap may lie in the fact that only qualitative case studies or only standardized surveys exist so far, but a combination of both perspectives is missing.
7.6 Compatibility of Research Question, Research Gap, and Method
Regardless of the chosen methodological setting, the research question, research gap, and approach should be compatible in terms of content. A question that focuses on differences between groups requires a data basis that allows for appropriate comparisons. A question that focuses on processes and interpretations can only be answered to a limited extent with a highly standardized survey. In business informatics, it therefore makes sense to consider which methodological setting is realistic and appropriate for answering the question when formulating the research question.
When the topic, gap, question, and method are coherently aligned, a clear line emerges: the literature reveals a gap, the gap leads to a precise question, and the question leads to an appropriate study design. This not only makes it easier to carry out the work, but also makes it easy for readers to follow.