1️⃣ Read the topic
Underline the key words. Who is being studied? What about them? This tells you who your sample is and what kind of evidence you need.
Investigating Society » Planning Your Own Research Investigation
What you'll learn this session
Study time: 30 minutes
Cambridge spec: Paper 1 Question 1(e)
- What Question 1(e) asks you to do and why you do not need to know the topic
- A five-step method for building a research plan
- How to give reasons that link each choice to the topic
- One full model plan on a made-up topic
🔒 Unlock Full Course Content
Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseThe question that lets you be the researcher
Question 1(e) is your chance to be the researcher and design your own investigation - worth 12 marks
Every Paper 1 has one compulsory question that asks you to plan some research. It is Question 1(e), it is worth 12 marks in the specimen paper, and it is the one place in the course where you design your own investigation.
It asks you to explain the primary methods, sampling and secondary evidence you would use to investigate a topic you are given, and to give reasons for your choices. In the specimen paper this means two primary methods, each with a sample, and one source of secondary evidence.
Here is the good news. You are not tested on the topic itself. You could be given a topic you know nothing about and still get full marks, because the examiner is checking your knowledge of research methods. You also do not need to judge your own plan by listing its strengths and limitations. Your time is better spent on reasons.
Key terms:
- Research plan: a written account of which methods, which sample and which secondary evidence you would use to investigate a topic.
- Justify: to give reasons why a choice suits the topic.
A five-step method
Do not just list methods you can remember. Build your plan in the same order every time.
2️⃣ Pick two primary methods
Choose two different methods from the course: questionnaire, interview or observation. Two methods that give different kinds of data usually work well together.
3️⃣ Sample each method
Say who you would study, where the names come from (the sampling frame) and which sampling technique you would use. Each method needs its own sample.
4️⃣ Pick one secondary source
Choose statistics, documents, digital sources or media content that already exist and fit the topic. Name the actual source.
5️⃣ Give reasons
For every choice, say why it suits this topic. A reason must mention the topic, not just the method.
✅ Check the count
Two primary methods, two samples, one secondary source, and a reason for each. If any is missing, you have lost marks you could have had.
Choice, how, because
Use this three-part pattern for each method and for the secondary source.
- Choice: "I would use..." (name the method)
- How: who, how many, and how they are chosen (the sample)
- Because: the reason this fits the topic
Give about the same effort to each of the three parts of the plan: first method, second method, secondary source. A plan that spends all its time on one method leaves marks behind.
What makes a good reason?
A weak reason could be written about any topic: "because questionnaires are quick." A strong reason is tied to this topic and these people.
- Weak: "I would use interviews because they give detailed answers."
- Strong: "I would use interviews because the topic is about why people hold their opinions, and interviews let me ask follow-up questions to find out their reasons."
Good reasons usually come from three places: the type of data the topic needs (numbers or detailed meanings), the people being studied (how many, how easy to reach, how old) and the practical and ethical side (time, cost, access, consent). You met all of these in earlier lessons, so here you are simply using them.
Make sure the sampling technique you name matches the people you describe. If the group is hard to find, snowball sampling fits. If you have a list and want fair groups, stratified fits.
Full model plan
Studying why some households recycle more? A council address list makes a handy sampling frame for posting questionnaires
Worked example
Topic (made-up): Why some households in a city recycle more than others.
Method 1: self-completion questionnaire. I would post a short questionnaire to 300 households. The council keeps a list of addresses, which is my sampling frame. I would use stratified sampling by housing type (flats, terraced houses and detached houses), so that each type is fairly represented, and pick households at random within each. I would use a questionnaire because the topic is about households across the whole city, and a questionnaire reaches many people cheaply and gives quantitative data I can compare between housing types.
Method 2: semi-structured interviews. I would interview 12 households, using a quota sample of four from each housing type, taken from questionnaire respondents who say they are happy to be interviewed. I would use interviews because the questionnaire shows who recycles more, but not why. Interviews let me ask follow-up questions to find out people's reasons and give qualitative data.
Secondary evidence: official statistics. I would use the council's published figures for the weight of waste recycled in each area of the city. These already exist, so they save time and cost, and they cover the whole city. I can use them to compare what households say in the questionnaire with the amounts actually collected.
Notice what the plan does well. Every choice is named, every sample says who and how, and every "because" refers to recycling, households or the city. The two methods give different data, and the secondary source adds a check on what people say.
Common mistakes
Listing methods with no reasons. Giving only one method. Naming a sampling technique without saying who is in the sample. Choosing secondary evidence that is vague ("the internet") instead of a named source. Writing about what you already know of the topic instead of research methods. Giving reasons that fit any topic.
Exam-style question
(e) A city council wants to know what local residents think about a new bike-sharing scheme.
Explain the research methods and evidence you would choose to investigate this topic. You must include two primary methods with sampling and one source of secondary evidence. Give reasons for your choices. [12 marks]
Model answer
Method 1: I would use an online questionnaire (1). The sampling frame would be the council's list of registered residents, and I would use a random sample of 400 people from the list (1). I would use a questionnaire because residents live all over the city, and an online questionnaire reaches many people cheaply and gives numbers on how many are for or against the scheme (1). Closed questions would also let me compare answers from different age groups (1).
Method 2: I would use focus groups (1). I would use a quota sample of 6 people in each of three age groups (under 25, 25 to 55, over 55), found by asking questionnaire respondents who are willing to take part (1). I would use focus groups because opinions about a new scheme are often shaped by what others say, and a discussion lets me hear people explain and argue their views in depth (1). This gives qualitative data to explain the questionnaire results (1).
Secondary evidence: I would use the scheme operator's usage figures, such as the number of bikes hired each day in each part of the city (1). These are statistics that already exist, so they save time and cost, and they show how much the scheme is used in each part of the city (1). I can compare how much the scheme is actually used with what residents say they think of it (1). The questionnaire and the focus group give different kinds of data, so together they build a fuller picture (1).
The marks shown are only a guide to what a good answer includes, not Cambridge's own mark scheme.
Exam tip
Before you write, jot down three headings: Method 1, Method 2, Secondary evidence. Then fill in choice, how and because under each one, so nothing is missed.