Research Gap Identifier

Legitimate gaps are understudied areas with theoretical or practical importance. Indicators of significant gaps: (1) Multiple scholars note the limitation in discussion sections, (2) Contradictory findings suggest missing moderators or mechanisms, (3) Rapidly changing contexts (technology, policy) make previous research obsolete, (4) Theoretical predictions untested empirically, (5) Populations or settings systematically excluded from prior work. Insignificant omissions: hyper-specific combinations unlikely to generate new insights, slight methodological variations without theoretical justification, trivial extensions. Ask: Does filling this gap advance theory, inform practice, or resolve conflicting findings? If not, it may not warrant investigation.

Avoid claiming "no research exists" unless you conducted exhaustive search. More accurate framings: "Limited research examines...", "Few studies investigate X in context Y...", "Prior research focuses primarily on Z while overlooking X..." Use scoping reviews to map existing literature systematically. Search multiple databases with various keyword combinations. Check if research exists under different terminology. The gap is rarely "no research" but rather: insufficient research for firm conclusions, methodological limitations requiring new approaches, unexplored populations/contexts, or missing theoretical perspectives. Frame gaps as opportunities for contribution, not absolute voids.