Introduction:

Many authors face the challenge of striking a balance between acknowledging the
weaknesses and constraints of their research while avoiding the risk of paper rejection.
However, before embarking on any study, it is essential for a researcher in research to
understand the meanings and operational definitions of the terms ‘limitations’ and
‘delimitations.’ The objective of this study is to define, assess, and elaborate on how
limitations and delimitations are currently recognized in research.
It is clear that every research endeavor inherently carries limitations and delimitations.
These limitations relate to the underlying theories, research design, potential for
replication, issues in data collection and questionnaire design, inadequacy of subgroups
or data for robust statistical analysis, limited timeframes for data collection, neglect of
seasonal variations and incomplete data, causal relationships, measurement errors,
study environments, the population or sample studied, ethical considerations, data
collection and analysis procedures, result interpretations, and consequent conclusions.
Delimitations require researchers to critically assess their assumptions and candidly
disclose shortcomings that could have been better addressed. Some authors mention
study limitations merely because it is a requirement set by journal policies. In such
cases, the weakest limitation might be presented as an effort to increase the study’s
chances of publication. Researchers should have a comprehensive understanding of
the broad spectrum of limitations and delimitations and address them early in the
research process.

Limitations:
Limitations in a research study pertain to potential weaknesses that are typically beyond
the researcher’s control and are closely linked to factors such as the chosen research
design, constraints of the statistical model, funding restrictions, and other such
elements. These limitations are essentially imposed restrictions that the researcher
cannot alter. Nevertheless, they can influence the study’s design, outcomes, and
ultimately the conclusions, and therefore, they should be clearly acknowledged when
presenting the research. For instance, when investigating how participants respond to a
survey, the researcher might be confined to a small geographical area, which may not
provide a comprehensive range of responses.
In quantitative studies, such a sample may not be representative, and in qualitative
research, data saturation might not be achieved. Regarding measurements and testing,
the research tool itself can act as a limiting factor, yielding results that are relatively
constrained. For instance, while a reliable set of scales would be suitable for measuring
weight, it would offer only one of the two crucial parameters for estimating body mass
index. Time can also be a limiting factor, potentially skewing study results. For example,
the time of year during which data is collected in a study on dietary habits could limit the
scope of conclusions drawn. Moreover, larger societal factors and economic trends that
coincide with the study period should be acknowledged as potential limitations.
Data analysis methodology represents another area where limitations may arise. For
instance, many qualitative methodologies cannot be fully replicated under controlled
experimental conditions, making them difficult to verify in the traditional sense.
Concerning quantitative statistical analysis, most models can effectively determine
correlations between two or more variables but do not establish causation. Therefore,
it’s essential to explicitly state all these limitations to prevent the distortion and
misinterpretation of results by a broader audience. Unfortunately, during the reporting of
results, researchers may sometimes overlook these crucial aspects due to their
excitement about conducting and presenting research.

Delimitations:
Delimitations essentially refer to the intentional boundaries and restrictions established
by the authors themselves. They pertain to the definitions and parameters that
researchers choose to set as the limits of their work, ensuring that the study’s objectives
remain feasible. Delimitations are under the control of the researcher and are primarily
concerned with the study’s theoretical foundation, objectives, research questions,
variables under examination, and the sample used in the study. It is crucial to clearly
present the alternatives considered and the reasons for their rejection, such as the
specific sampling method chosen among several options, to provide readers with
complete information.
In essence, delimitations answer the question, “Why didn’t I do it this way?” They
explain the reasons for rejecting specific research approaches during the research
process and present the available options along with a brief rationale. Factors
influencing the selection of a particular method, like resource availability, practical
considerations, ethical and permit requirements, or time constraints, should be
discussed. Delimitations are not inherently positive or negative; they serve as a detailed
account of the reasoning that defines the scope of the study, particularly in relation to
the research design and underlying philosophical framework.

Conclusions:
It is imperative to engage in constructive reevaluation and restructuring of the global
nursing and biomedical research agenda to elevate the profession’s standards and gain
the public’s trust. Consequently, authors should openly and extensively communicate
their research limitations, delimitations, and assumptions to enhance the quality of their
findings and the interpretation of the presented evidence. Conversely, when any of
these crucial elements are neglected, overlooked, or concealed, it poses a risk to the
study’s credibility.
https://gradcoach.com/research-limitations-vs-delimitations/
https://www.spnj.gr/articlefiles/volume7_issue3/pn_sep_73_155_162b.pdf