Silke Kniffert, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité- Universitätsmedizin Berlin, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
Ivan Buljan, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Split, Poljička cesta 35, Split, Croatia
Flavio Azevedo, Department of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
Peter Babinčák, Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, University of Presov, Presov, Slovakia
Lucija Batinović, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University Sweden, Linköping, Sweden
Thomas Rhys Evans, School of Human Sciences and Institute for Lifecourse Development, University of Greenwich, London, UK
Sara Garofalo, Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
Christopher Graham, Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland
Lucianne Groenink, Division of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
Malika Ihle, LMU Open Science Center, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
Milosav Klugar, Cochrane Czech Republic, Czech Republic: A JBI Centre of Excellence, Czech GRADE Network, Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic, Prague, Czech Republic; Center of Evidence-based Education and Arts Therapies: A JBI Affiliated Group, Faculty of Education, Palacký University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic
Lucia Kočišová, Faculty of Education, University of Trnava, Trnava, Slovakia
Michal Kohút, Faculty of Philosophy and Arts, Trnava University, Trnava, Slovakia
Nikolaos Kostomitsopoulos, Biomedical Research Foundation Academy of Athens, Athens, Greece
Seán Lacey, Munster Technological University, Cork, IrelandFollow
Anita Lunić, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Split, Split, Croatia
Ana Marušić, Center for Evidence-based Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia
Thomas Nordström, Department of Psychology, Linnaeus University, Vaxjo, Sweden
Charlotte R. Pennington, Aston University, Birmingham, UK
Daniel Pizzolato, European Network of Research Ethics Committees (EUREC), Bonn, Germany
Ulf Toelch, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité- Universitätsmedizin Berlin, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
Marta Topor, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University Sweden, Linköping, Sweden
Miro Vuković, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia
Michiel R. de Boer, Department of Primary and Long-term Care, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands

Document Type

Article

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Disciplines

Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research | Educational Methods | Higher Education | Higher Education and Teaching | Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Publication Details

Research Integrity and Peer Review

Abstract

Background

Research methodology education aims to equip students with the foundational knowledge of robust scientific practices, emphasizing deep understanding of scientific inquiry, integrity, and critical thinking in research practice. A literature review reveals that the observed diversity in research methods course design and instruction stems from a lack of consensus about the essential foundations required to critically engage with, design, and execute research in education. This is further compounded by a limited pedagogical innovation. However, no study has yet investigated how research methodology is taught and perceived across European universities. The objective of this study is to examine practices and attitudes regarding teaching research methodology in different European countries, across different disciplines and different training stages to identify commonalities and discrepancies.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was designed based on the Structure of Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO) taxonomy and further developed in several rounds of expert input and feedback, ensuring comprehensive inclusion of diverse teaching formats and assessment types. The survey was distributed to research methodology and non-research methodology higher education teachers across Europe through stratified and snowball sampling methods.

Results

The survey was completed by 559 respondents across 24 countries and seven disciplinary categories. The findings identified a predominant reliance on traditional passive teaching formats, such as face-to-face or online lectures. Active methods such as flipped classroom (8.4% Bachelor, 4.8% Master, 2.3% PhD) and protocol writing (8.2% Bachelor, 6.6% Master, 3.9% PhD) were less frequently used. Written exams dominated assessment strategies at all levels. Across our stratification levels, all topics were rated very important, with hypothesis formulation, research integrity, and study design as the most necessary topics, while pre-registration, peer review, and data management plan were prioritized slightly less.

Conclusions

These findings reveal relative homogeneity in research methodology teaching across academic levels and disciplines in Europe. The persistence of passive teaching formats and the limited adoption of active methodologies reflects an untapped opportunity to improve the effectiveness of research methodology education in fostering critical thinking and ethical practices. Higher education institutions need to reevaluate research methodology curricula to better align with contemporary research demands.

Download

Share

COinS