Bolanle Jolapamo, Lydia Oko-Epelle, Sunday Adeagbo


This study examined the perception of communication scholar on their preference of communication research approach with the objectives to: ascertain the type of research approach communication scholars adopt in scientific research, and know what influences or stimulates the choice of the research approach adopted by communication scholars.  The study adopted survey design as means of investigation. Online questionnaire was structured for data collection. Census was adopted for the study where 28 respondents who are lecturers were drawn from Fountain University, Osogbo, Redeemer’s University, Ede, and Osun State Polytechnic, Iree. Study revealed that mass communication scholar adopts mixed-method in their approach in addressing communication research as survey was revealed to be the most adopted design; and that communication scholars’ preference for a research approach is often determined by the nature of research a scholar is embarking on for easy comprehension of data collected. It was recommended therefore that scholars should continue to encourage one another to continually adopt the mixed-method approach with other designs such as KAP, FGD etc.   


Communication Research, Mixed-method, Qualitative Research, Quantitative research, Scholars

Full Text:



Abdullahi, A. A., Senekal, A., Zyl-Schalekamp, C. V., Amzat, J. &Saliman, T. (2012).Contemporary Discourses in Qualitative Research: Lessons for Health Research in Nigeria. African Sociological Review, vol. 16(1), pp. 19-40

Barzum, J. and Gaff, F. (1970). The modern researcher. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World Inc.

Berg, B. L. (2009). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (7th ed.). Pearson International.

Berg, B. L., & Lune, H. (2012). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (8th ed.). Pearson Education.

Black, T. (1999). Doing quantitative research in the social sciences. London: Sage Publications ltd.

Blaikie, N. (2007). Approaches to social enquiry (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (2001). How to research (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press. Bouwer, R., Béguin, A., Sanders, T., & van den Bergh, H. (2015). Effect of genre on the generalizability of writing scores. Language Testing, 32(1), 83-100.

Borg, S. (2015). Professional development through the Cambridge English/English UK Action Research Scheme. Cambridge English Language Assessment: Research Notes, 61.

Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and quality in social research. London: Sage. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. New York: Oxford University Press.

Carr, L. T. (1994). The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research: What method for nursing? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20(4), 716-721.

Carroll, P. E., & Bailey, A. L. (2016). Do decision rules matter? A descriptive study of English language proficiency assessment classifications for English-language learners and native English speakers in fifth grade. Language Testing, 33(1), 23-52.

Chalhoub-Deville, M., & Deville, C. (2008). Utilizing psychometric methods in assessment. In E. Shohamy, & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd ed., Vol. 7, pp. 211-224). New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media LLC.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). London: Routledge. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Corbetta, P. (2003). Social research: Theory, methods and techniques. London: SAGE.

Connolly, P. (2007). Quantitative data analysis in education: A critical introduction using SPSS. London & New York, NY: Routledge.

Crano, W. D., Brewer, M. B., & Lac, A. (2015). Principles and methods of social research (3rd ed.). London and New York, NY: Routledge.

Creswell, J.W.(2014). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches. United Kingdom: SAGE Publication Inc.

Cumming, A. (2001). ESL/EFL instructors’ practices for writing assessment: Specific purposes or general purposes? Language Testing, 18(2), 207-224.

Dane, F. C. (1990). Research Methods. California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Darlington, Y., & Scott, D. (2003). Qualitative research in practice: Stories from the field. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 22(1), 115-118.

Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2002). The qualitative inquiry reader. London: Sage Publications.

Egbetokun, A., Olofinyehun, A., Sanni, M., Ayo-Lawal, A., Oluwatope, O. &Utieyineshola, Y. (2022). The Production of Social Science research in Nigeria: Status and Systematic determinants.Humnanities& Social Sciences Communications.

lecture note developed for National Open University of Nigeria.

Ojebode, A., Ojebuyi, B. R., Oladapo, O. A. &Oyedele, O. J. (2018). Mono-Method Research Approach and Scholar–Policy Disengagement in Nigerian Communication Research. Retrieved from:

Okokpujie, I. P., Fayomi, O. S. &Lareno, R. O. (2018). The Role of Research in Economic Development IOP Conf., Series: Materials Science and Engineering.

Park, D., Babrudim, F. I. & Han, J. (2020). Circular Reasoning for the Evolution of research Through a Strategic Construction of research Methodologies. International Journals of Quantitative research Methods, Vol. 8(3), pp. 1-3. Issn: 2056-3639

Tejumaye, A, J.(2003). Mass communication research: an introduction. Dapson International Nigeria limited

Thompson, K. (2016). Factors Affecting Choice of Research Methods. Retrieved from http//

Williams, C. (2007). Research Methods. Journal of Business & Economic research, Vol, 5(3), pp. 65-72

Wilson, D., Esiri, M., and Onwubere, C. H.(2008). Communication research. Unpublished


  • There are currently no refbacks.