How to choose a methodology

A decision path from research question to methodology, plus how to write the justification examiners are looking for.

9 min read · Reviewed 2026

A methodology chapter is not a description of what you did. It is a justification of why what you did was the right way to answer your question, and an honest account of what it cost you.

Work outwards from the question, and every later choice becomes easier to defend.

The decision path

Take these decisions in order; skipping one makes the next indefensible.

What kind of claim does my question require?
What philosophical position makes that claim meaningful?
Which approach follows — deductive, inductive or abductive?
Which design delivers it — survey, case study, experiment, ethnography, grounded theory?
Which methods, sample and timeframe are realistic for me?
How will I analyse the data, and how will I judge quality?

Justify by comparison

The strongest justification names the alternative you rejected and says why. 'A survey would have measured attitudes at scale but could not have captured how participants account for their decisions, which is what the question asks.' That sentence is worth more than a page of textbook definitions.

Limitations are not weaknesses

Every design trades something away. Naming those trade-offs shows methodological awareness. Hiding them invites the examiner to find them for you in the viva.

Common mistakes

Reciting definitions of positivism and interpretivism without applying them.
Describing procedure without justifying it.
Choosing a design your ethics approval or timescale cannot support.
Never mentioning the alternatives you rejected.

Try this: The because chain

Write: 'My question requires… because…'
Then: 'That means my position is… because…'
Then: 'So my design is… rather than… because…'
Read the chain aloud. Any link that does not follow is the one an examiner will attack.

Do it in SuperDiss

Build the justification chain and rehearse the defence.

Open the Methodology Lab