This post is part of the continuing mini-series on RQ–RH–D–M across fields. Its purpose is to provide a compact, practical toolkit showing how research questions, research hypotheses or working propositions, data, and methodology can be aligned in one specific discipline.
Geography is especially suitable for this kind of exercise because it naturally connects space, place, environment, mobility, population, land use, inequality, climate, regional development and spatial perception. It also supports quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods designs, making it ideal for showing how the same geographic issue can be studied through spatial indicators, surveys, maps, remote sensing, interviews, field observation and integrated designs.
In geography, theoretical starting points often include human geography frameworks, spatial theory, place and sense-of-place approaches, political ecology, mobility theory, urban theory, environment–society frameworks, regional development models and GIS- and spatial-analysis traditions. These frameworks guide the construction of questions and hypotheses about location, movement, inequality, accessibility, territoriality, environmental exposure, regional difference or spatial behavior and the corresponding constructs are measured through spatial coordinates, distance measures, mapping layers, demographic and socioeconomic indicators, field observations, narratives of place or combined spatial and qualitative datasets.
Note: The entries in the Methodology are intentionally general and indicative. They are meant to illustrate plausible methodological directions, not to exhaust the full range of possible methods, model variants or analytic choices available to the researcher. Researchers are not expected to apply all of the methodological tools listed in column Methodology in a single study. The entries are intended to indicate suitable methodological options or families of approaches from which the researcher selects those that best fit the research question, hypothesis, data, and design.
Geography- quantitative research
Descriptive questions
-
RQ: What is the average population density of suburban municipalities in a metropolitan region?
RH: The average population density of suburban municipalities in the metropolitan region is below 1,500 persons per square kilometer.
D: Population density (continuous/ratio); municipality type (categorical: suburban); metropolitan region identifier.
M: Descriptive statistics, one-sample t-test against benchmark, confidence intervals, GIS-based summary mapping.
-
RQ: What proportion of urban households live within a 10-minute walk of a public green space?
RH: Fewer than 60% of urban households live within a 10-minute walk of a public green space.
D: Access to green space within 10-minute walk (binary); household location coordinates or census block; urban area identifier.
M: Frequencies, proportions, binomial test, network accessibility analysis, GIS service-area analysis.
-
RQ: What is the average annual land-cover change rate in a coastal district over the last decade?
RH: The average annual land-cover change rate in the coastal district exceeds 2% over the last decade.
D: Land-cover change rate (continuous); year (time); district ID; land-cover category.
M: Descriptive statistics, one-sample tests, remote sensing change detection summaries, time-series plots.
-
RQ: How many daily trips are made on average by commuters in a medium-sized city?
RH: Commuters in the medium-sized city make more than 2 daily trips on average.
D: Number of daily trips (count); commuter status (categorical); city identifier.
M: Descriptive statistics, one-sample tests, Poisson/negative binomial summaries, travel survey tabulation.
Comparative questions
-
RQ: Do neighborhoods with high public transport access differ from low-access neighborhoods in car ownership rates?
RH: Neighborhoods with high public transport access have lower car ownership rates than low-access neighborhoods.
D: Car ownership rate (continuous/proportion); transit access category (categorical: high/low); neighborhood ID.
M: Independent-samples t-test, Mann–Whitney U test, OLS regression, spatial regression as alternative.
-
RQ: Do flood-prone and non-flood-prone settlements differ in housing prices?
RH: Flood-prone settlements have lower average housing prices than non-flood-prone settlements.
D: Housing price (continuous); flood risk category (categorical: flood-prone/non-flood-prone); settlement ID.
M: t-test, ANOVA, hedonic price regression, spatial econometric models.
-
RQ: Are rural districts different from urban districts in internet accessibility rates?
RH: Rural districts have lower internet accessibility rates than urban districts.
D: Internet accessibility rate (continuous/proportion); district type (categorical: rural/urban); district ID.
M: t-test, OLS regression, beta regression, regional comparison mapping.
-
RQ: Do regions with protected area status differ from non-protected regions in deforestation rates?
RH: Regions with protected area status have lower deforestation rates than non-protected regions.
D: Deforestation rate (continuous); protection status (binary); region ID; year if longitudinal.
M: t-test, panel regression, difference-in-differences, GIS overlay analysis.
Relational / correlational questions
-
RQ: Is distance to the city center associated with average housing rent?
RH: Greater distance to the city center is associated with lower average housing rent.
D: Distance to city center (continuous); housing rent (continuous); neighborhood ID.
M: Pearson/Spearman correlation, OLS regression, spatial lag/error regression, hedonic modeling.
-
RQ: Is vegetation cover associated with land surface temperature in urban areas?
RH: Higher vegetation cover is associated with lower land surface temperature in urban areas.
D: Vegetation cover index (continuous); land surface temperature (continuous); spatial unit/grid cell ID.
M: Correlation, OLS regression, spatial regression, remote sensing raster analysis.
-
RQ: Is elevation associated with crop suitability in mountainous regions?
RH: Elevation is significantly associated with crop suitability in mountainous regions, with suitability declining beyond higher thresholds.
D: Elevation (continuous); crop suitability index (continuous); slope/aspect as controls; spatial unit ID.
M: Correlation, regression, polynomial regression, GIS suitability modeling.
-
RQ: Is neighborhood deprivation associated with lower accessibility to healthcare facilities?
RH: Higher neighborhood deprivation is associated with lower accessibility to healthcare facilities.
D: Deprivation index (continuous); healthcare accessibility metric (continuous); neighborhood ID.
M: Correlation, OLS regression, spatial accessibility models, multilevel regression.
Causal / experimental-style questions
-
RQ: What is the effect of a new bus rapid transit corridor on commuting time compared with unaffected corridors?
RH: Areas served by the new bus rapid transit corridor will show greater reductions in commuting time than unaffected areas.
D: Corridor treatment status (binary); commuting time pre/post (continuous); area ID; time period.
M: Difference-in-differences, panel regression, multilevel modeling, GIS network analysis.
-
RQ: Does introducing an urban tree-planting intervention reduce local surface temperature in treated zones?
RH: Treated zones with urban tree planting will show lower surface temperature than comparable untreated zones after implementation.
D: Treatment status (binary); land surface temperature pre/post (continuous); spatial unit ID; season/time controls.
M: Quasi-experimental design, difference-in-differences, panel regression, remote sensing-based impact analysis.
-
RQ: What is the effect of a flood-risk information campaign on household preparedness scores?
RH: Households exposed to the flood-risk information campaign will report higher preparedness scores than non-exposed households.
D: Campaign exposure (binary); preparedness score (continuous/scale); household ID; location ID.
M: Experimental or quasi-experimental design, ANCOVA, logistic/linear regression, multilevel models.
-
RQ: Does pedestrianization of a central street increase foot traffic compared with nearby non-pedestrianized streets?
RH: Pedestrianized streets will show greater increases in foot traffic than comparable nearby non-pedestrianized streets.
D: Street treatment status (binary); foot traffic counts pre/post (count); street segment ID; time period.
M: Difference-in-differences, count regression, interrupted time series, spatial comparison design.
Geography – qualitative research
Place, identity, and everyday spatial experience
-
RQ: How do residents describe their sense of place in rapidly changing urban neighborhoods?
WP / RH: Residents are likely to describe sense of place as shaped by memory, belonging, displacement pressure, and everyday routines.
D: In-depth interviews, neighborhood walks, place narratives, field notes; key dimensions: belonging, memory, change.
M: Thematic analysis, narrative inquiry, phenomenological analysis, place-based qualitative case study.
-
RQ: How do migrants describe their relationship to home, mobility, and place attachment across multiple locations?
WP / RH: Migrants are likely to describe place attachment as distributed across locations rather than fixed in one place.
D: Interviews, mobility narratives, migration histories, mental maps.
M: Narrative inquiry, thematic analysis, qualitative mapping, phenomenological analysis.
-
RQ: How do students describe everyday experiences of public space in a university town?
WP / RH: Students are likely to describe public space through safety, convenience, sociability, and symbolic ownership.
D: Interviews, walk-along reflections, spatial diaries, observation notes.
M: Thematic analysis, mobile methods, phenomenological analysis, ethnographic case study.
Environment, risk, and local perception
-
RQ: How do residents in flood-prone communities describe living with seasonal flood risk?
WP / RH: Residents are likely to describe flood risk through routine adaptation, uncertainty, environmental memory, and uneven vulnerability.
D: Interviews, community discussions, seasonal narratives, local risk maps used qualitatively.
M: Thematic analysis, narrative inquiry, community case study, participatory qualitative methods.
-
RQ: How do farmers describe landscape change in drought-affected regions?
WP / RH: Farmers are likely to describe landscape change through water scarcity, vegetation loss, altered timing, and livelihood stress.
D: Interviews, field notes, local observations, landscape photographs as elicitation prompts.
M: Thematic analysis, environmental ethnography, narrative inquiry, participatory rural appraisal with qualitative interpretation.
-
RQ: How do coastal residents interpret erosion in relation to everyday life and future planning?
WP / RH: Coastal residents are likely to interpret erosion as both an environmental process and a threat to security, property, and continuity.
D: Interviews, household reflections, community records, shoreline narratives.
M: Thematic analysis, phenomenological analysis, case study, qualitative risk interpretation analysis.
Mobility, access, and spatial inequality
-
RQ: How do commuters describe the experience of long-distance travel to work in metropolitan regions?
WP / RH: Commuters are likely to describe long-distance travel as structured by fatigue, scheduling, compromise, and unequal access to opportunity.
D: Interviews, travel diaries, route narratives, transit-use reflections.
M: Thematic analysis, narrative inquiry, mobility studies case analysis, framework analysis.
-
RQ: How do residents in peripheral areas describe access to healthcare and public services?
WP / RH: Residents are likely to describe access as shaped by travel time, administrative barriers, transport limits, and feelings of neglect.
D: Interviews, access narratives, service-use diaries, local field notes.
M: Thematic analysis, phenomenological analysis, community case study, qualitative content analysis.
-
RQ: How do women describe safety in public transport spaces at different times of day?
WP / RH: Women are likely to describe safety as shaped by crowding, lighting, surveillance, past experience, and route familiarity.
D: Interviews, travel diaries, safety maps, route reflections.
M: Thematic analysis, qualitative mapping, phenomenological analysis, mobile interview methods.
Regional development, governance, and planning
-
RQ: How do local officials describe the challenges of implementing regional development strategies in peripheral areas?
WP / RH: Local officials are likely to describe implementation challenges through funding limits, institutional fragmentation, and local capacity constraints.
D: Interviews, planning documents, meeting notes, policy implementation records.
M: Thematic analysis, policy case study, framework analysis, qualitative governance analysis.
-
RQ: How do planners interpret the tension between conservation goals and urban expansion?
WP / RH: Planners are likely to describe this tension as a negotiation between environmental protection, housing demand, and political pressure.
D: Interviews, planning reports, land-use plans, public consultation notes.
M: Thematic analysis, discourse analysis, planning case study, document analysis.
-
RQ: How do residents describe participation in local spatial planning processes?
WP / RH: Residents are likely to describe participation as meaningful only when consultation is visible, accessible, and seen as consequential.
D: Interviews, public meeting observations, consultation documents, resident reflections.
M: Thematic analysis, participatory governance case study, narrative inquiry, framework analysis.
Mapping, representation, and geographic knowledge
-
RQ: How do geographers describe the interpretive limits of maps in representing lived space?
WP / RH: Geographers are likely to describe maps as analytically useful but incomplete in capturing emotion, practice, and contested meanings.
D: Interviews, map commentaries, teaching or research reflections, annotated map materials.
M: Thematic analysis, discourse analysis, qualitative cartography case study, narrative inquiry.
-
RQ: How do community members interpret participatory mapping projects in relation to local knowledge?
WP / RH: Community members are likely to interpret participatory mapping as empowering when it reflects lived knowledge, but limiting when it simplifies it.
D: Interviews, mapping workshop notes, local narratives, community-generated maps.
M: Thematic analysis, participatory qualitative methods, case study, visual-material analysis.
-
RQ: How do GIS practitioners describe the challenge of translating complex spatial analysis for non-specialist audiences?
WP / RH: GIS practitioners are likely to describe translation challenges through technical abstraction, visual simplification, and audience expectation.
D: Interviews, presentation materials, practitioner reflections, communication examples.
M: Thematic analysis, discourse analysis, practitioner inquiry, qualitative content analysis.
Geography – mixed methods
Urban space, access, and inequality
-
RQ: How is neighborhood deprivation associated with access to green space, and how do residents describe the quality and usability of nearby green areas?
RH / WP: Higher neighborhood deprivation will be associated with lower access to green space; residents are likely to describe nearby green areas through safety, maintenance, distance, and social comfort; integration is expected to explain why measured proximity does not always translate into meaningful access.
D: Quantitative: deprivation index, green-space accessibility metric, neighborhood variables; Qualitative: resident interviews, walk-along narratives, field notes.
M: Explanatory sequential design, spatial regression/accessibility analysis plus thematic analysis, joint display integration.
-
RQ: What differences exist in commuting burden across transport-access categories, and how do commuters explain those differences in everyday life?
RH / WP: Areas with weaker transport access will show higher commuting burden; commuters are likely to explain burden through waiting time, transfers, reliability, and life disruption; integration is expected to refine interpretation of transport-access inequalities.
D: Quantitative: commuting time/cost, transport access category, area variables; Qualitative: interviews, travel diaries, route reflections.
M: Convergent mixed methods design, group comparison/regression plus thematic analysis, merged interpretation through joint displays.
Environment, risk, and adaptation
-
RQ: How is flood exposure associated with household preparedness, and how do residents describe the practical meaning of preparedness in flood-prone areas?
RH / WP: Higher flood exposure will be associated with higher preparedness only where resources and prior experience are present; residents are likely to describe preparedness through routine adaptations, financial limits, and local knowledge; integration is expected to explain uneven preparedness across similarly exposed areas.
D: Quantitative: flood exposure index, preparedness score, household characteristics; Qualitative: interviews, community narratives, preparedness reflections.
M: Explanatory sequential design, regression/logistic models plus thematic analysis, integrated interpretation.
-
RQ: What is the relationship between land-cover change and local livelihood stress, and how do residents interpret those environmental changes?
RH / WP: Greater land-cover change will be associated with higher reported livelihood stress; residents are likely to interpret environmental change through resource decline, seasonal disruption, and uncertainty; integration is expected to connect remotely sensed change with lived local consequences.
D: Quantitative: land-cover change measures, livelihood stress indicators, location variables; Qualitative: interviews, local narratives, field notes, photo elicitation.
M: Convergent mixed methods design, GIS/remote sensing change analysis plus thematic analysis, matrix-based integration.
Place, planning, and governance
-
RQ: How are redevelopment indicators associated with neighborhood turnover, and how do residents describe the lived experience of those changes?
RH / WP: Higher redevelopment intensity will be associated with greater neighborhood turnover; residents are likely to describe change through rising costs, altered identity, and loss of familiarity; integration is expected to explain how redevelopment metrics translate into lived displacement or transformation.
D: Quantitative: redevelopment indicators, residential turnover, property values, neighborhood variables; Qualitative: interviews, neighborhood narratives, field observations.
M: Explanatory sequential design, panel/regression analysis plus thematic analysis, joint display integration.
-
RQ: What differences exist in planning satisfaction across communities with different levels of public participation, and how do residents interpret the meaning of participation?
RH / WP: Communities with higher levels of visible public participation will report higher planning satisfaction; residents are likely to interpret participation through access, voice, responsiveness, and trust; integration is expected to clarify which forms of participation matter most for satisfaction.
D: Quantitative: planning satisfaction score, participation level, community characteristics; Qualitative: interviews, consultation narratives, meeting notes.
M: Convergent mixed methods design, group comparison/multilevel regression plus thematic analysis, integrated interpretation using joint displays.
Director of Wellington based My Statistical Consultant Ltd company. Retired Associate Professor in Statistics.
Has a PhD in Statistics and over 45 years experience as a university professor, consultant, international researcher and government advisor.