Video Summary - How to Identify a Research Gap? - Free Course on Thesis Proposal Writing (See Links Below)

Main ideas: What a research gap is

Definition (broadly understood): A research gap is the problem/question that researchers want to see addressed and that is missing or not adequately addressed in the current state of knowledge.
In other words: It is the unanswered question in a specific area of specialization.
Why it matters:
- It establishes the need/importance/urgency/necessity of the proposed research (thesis/dissertation).
- All research begins with a research gap.
- Without a clearly articulated gap, the proposal may be rejected.
How it is evaluated: Experienced reviewers/panel members look specifically for whether the candidate can clearly articulate the research gap during the proposal defense.

Many masters/doctoral students:

Start with a research aim and assume it is the same as the research gap (but it is not).
Copy/pattern their topic from prior studies without identifying what is still missing.

Correct distinction:

Research aim: what you plan to determine/study.
Research gap: what is not yet answered in the literature/knowledge base.

Working title: “Imposed Career Study among University Students in Hong Kong”
Research aim (what the study will determine):
- Determine the lived experiences of students forced to take a career course based on parents/significant others’ wishes.
- Examine effects on psycho-emotional and social well-being.
How the research gap is identified (what’s missing):
- The literature indicates that:
  - These forced students become devastated and rebellious.
  - This could lead to future social delinquency.
- However: no study has been conducted in Hong Kong on this exact issue/topic.
Resulting research gap statement (core missing element): The gap is the lack of research in Hong Kong on forced career-course imposition and its effects on these students’ well-being and outcomes.

Clear articulation helps:

Avoid major revisions (“unnecessary toil”).
Make the thesis/dissertation publishable.
Demonstrate originality/uniqueness (not duplication of prior work).
Show to reviewers that the researcher has deep knowledge and can identify innovative topics.

The lecture emphasizes that finding and articulating gaps is not easy, but essential.

The speaker provides three main techniques (claimed to be among the most effective).

Choose a topic that feels like “second skin” to you.
Rationale: Passion increases persistence and enjoyment, turning long work into “play.”

Implementation examples (as given):

Education: teachers’ burnout, philosophy of education, critical pedagogy, lived experiences of teachers handling subjects outside their field.
Psychology: social cognition, social control, racism, verbal communication, attraction/romance/love.

After choosing a topic, identify recent debates/mega trends.
Why this matters:
- Ensures the research is timely (addresses what is current).
- Ensures it is necessary (addresses an urgent problem).
Practical implication: this requires doing a literature review.

Read recent publications to:
- Understand what scholars have already done (their concepts/arguments).
- Identify missing aspects that could be filled by new research.

Example scenario (anthropology + indigenous peoples in Southeast Asia):

Topic: marginalization of indigenous peoples (specifically Dayak in Borneo).
Several scholars are described with different angles:
- Forced to the periphery by modernity/consumerism.
- Causes linked to militarism.
- Focus on resilience despite marginalizing forces.
- Marginalization via globalization (logging/mining companies).
- Marginalization plus rights recognition and basic rights.
Identified gap: No scholar has studied how the Dayak resisted marginalization.
Example of a possible research gap to pursue: The Dayak’s struggle for recognition of rights to ancestral domain.

The lecture states that the same principles for identifying research gaps can be applied to all disciplines, including:

Social sciences, humanities, natural sciences, education, engineering, mathematics, and psychology.

No individual speakers are named in the subtitles.
No external sources (specific real-world authors/works) are credited as authoritative citations; the scholars listed in the Dayak example are presented as illustrative examples (e.g., “scholar one… titled modernism and the dayak people of borneo,” etc.).