top of page

Research questions

1.1 Preliminary research

In research, we try to gather new information, present a new vision or solve a problem. This is done by answering a focused research question: the question to which, by means of research, an answer will be provided. It is therefore of great importance that the question on which the entire research is based is well-formulated. The question, after all, defines the area of investigation and provides guidance to organize and evaluate the flow of information. 

​

See Year 1, Preliminary research

1.2 How to get from a topic to a question

First, see Year 1, Subject choice.

​

Read existing literature on the topic of your interest and determine whether authors contradict each other and whether any information is lacking. Often, the introduction or conclusion of an article or book provides starting points for further research. Another good starting point is to carefully examine the object that you wish to research to see if you notice anything special, before you view the object through the eyes of the experts. 

 

While doing this, keep in mind that there are several perspectives regarding the choice of topic. You could, for instance, focus on:

  • the artist 

(Note: do not try to get inside the mind of the artist!)​

  • the work of art​

    • the manufacturing

    • the medium

    • style analysis

    • analysis of visual aspects

    • the topic and its symbolism

  • the context
    • the political context

    • cultural context

    • social context

    • philosophical context

    • the positioning of the work of art within Art History

    • the relationship with the patron

    • ​function of the artwork​​

  • the viewer

 

When you have found a topic, at least always ask yourself:

  1. "where?" (define the research area),

  2. "when?" (define the time period) 

  3. "what objects?" (define the corpus of research objects)

 

To then get from the topic to a question, it is important to define the research field. This makes the research feasible. For more information about definition, see Syllabus Year 1. Definition makes the research feasible. Definition requires further preliminary research. This preliminary research already has more focus than the preliminary research you did to arrive at your chosen topic. Now you must find out what is already known about the artwork (or the issue) before you can define it. Formulate what stood out to you about the artwork (or the issue) or what was missing from the literature in the interrogative form. Formulate what you noticed about the work of art or what was missing from the literature in the form of a question. 

1.1 PRELIMINARY RESEARCH
1.2 FROM TOPIC TO QUESTION

1.3 Research question requirements:

Make sure that the resulting question meets the following requirements.

​

The research question is:

​

  • Answerable: i.e. the question can be answered based on academic research within your discipline (or interdisciplinary) and answering the question must be feasible within the designated time and the specified number of words. When your question can be answered with a mere description of the work of art, the question remains of a descriptive nature and is not sufficiently academic. 

​​

  • Unambiguous: it must be clear what the question is referring to.

​​

  • Accurate: the topic must be well-defined to prevent the research from getting lost in larger topics. Make sure that all components of your research question are as specific as possible. Do not use vague terms such as 'an artwork' or 'other artworks’, but specify which work(s) you are referring to.

For instance: not 'How does the use of gold leaf in Virgin and Child Enthroned, and Prophets (ca. 1280 – 1290) differ from other works by Cimabue?’, but rather specify which other work: 'Why is the use of gold leaf in Virgin and Child Enthroned, and Prophets (ca. 1280 – 1290) by Cimabue different from that in Madonna with child (1283)?’

​

  • Open: the question cannot be answered with a mere ‘yes’ or ‘no’. 

​​

  • Phrased neutrally: your ideas about the answer to the question must not already be encapsulated within the phrasing of the question. Furthermore, the phrasing must not contain value judgments. This means that your research question must be able to stand on its own and that it can be understood without the reader first having to be aware of your point of view.

For example: a subjective term such as 'actually' suggests that you have already formed an opinion.​

​​

  • Aimed at source usage: it must already be clear from the formulation that sources will be consulted to answer the question. These sources must consist of academic texts (secundairy sources), but can be combined with primary sources (such as manifestos and interviews) and visual analyses. 

​​

  • Incorporated within the text: the research question should be asked within the text and should not be emphasised using quotation marks, blank lines, italics or bold characters. The subquestions should also be incorporated within the text and should not be written as an itemized list. 

​​

  • Phrased without parentheses: When you put something in parentheses, you are suggesting that that phrase is subordinate to the rest of the sentence that is not in parentheses. In a research question, every aspect must be significant. Therefore, you cannot afford to hide some parts of the research question in parentheses.

​

  • Not a circular argument: avoid questions that are the same as the criteria for the choice of research object. For example, when you choose a work of art because it is situated on the boundary between photography and digitally created images, do not ask the research question "Is this work of art photography or a digitally created image?". For the research question, take a step beyond just claiming that a work of art belongs within the topic of the assignment.

​​

​

The research question is NOT:

​

  • The same as the title or description of the topic: The research question should not coincide with the title of the research or with the description of the topic. The research question is more specific than just naming the research topic and is more neutral than a title. The title may indeed be enticing and should invite further reading. 

 

  • A hypothesis: The research question is not a hypothesis. Hypotheses are assumptions in the form of a statement and serve as a starting point for the outlining of a theory. An assumption requires a point of view and is therefore not as neutral as a research question should be. 

 

  • The same as the research objective: There is a difference between the research question and the research goal. Some authors explicitly mention the goal of their research, such as: "My goal is to expand the Modernist metaphor of a flat surface as a snowy landscape." The mentioning of this goal, however, is not equal to phrasing the related research question, which would be: "What insights does the metaphor of a snowy landscape provide within Modernist ideas?"

 

When, during the answering of the main research question, too much information is given or too many sidetracks are broached that are not directly relevant, it is a sign that the research question is formulated too generally. In that case, rephrasing is required, in which you should try to make the main research question more specific. The adjustment of the research question is a common part of the writing process. During almost any research the question needs to be adjusted or improved. It is only in the final phase that the conclusion should be matched to the research question - so be reflexive and flexible.

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION REQUIREMENTS

1.4 Different types of questions and phrasing:

1.4 DIFFERENT TYPES OF QUESTIONS
Critically analytical research questions

 

Academic research questions are essentially 'critical and analytical' in nature. This means that the researcher critically analyses their material. From this analysis, explicitly critically analytical research questions may arise. These kinds of questions often arise in art historical research, including in student papers and theses. For example, these questions use words such as “What insights does [core theoretical framework] provide into [main aspect of case/research object]?” or “How can [...] explain that/provide clarity about [...]?”

 

Within art historical research, several different categories of critically analytical research questions can be distinguished. Below we will explain that certain types of questions are essential to art historical research, while other types of questions are hardly relevant in the art historical research field. Here are some examples of categories of questions that are relevant.

​

​

  • Explanatory Question

With this question, you try to find the cause of a phenomenon ("how is it that ...?","What is the cause of…?", "What explains phenomenon X? "). This means that you are looking for links, reasons, causes, and consequences. Therefore, the question focuses on a causal relationship. 

For example: "Why were the stained glass windows of the St. Jans church in Gouda not destroyed during the Iconoclastic Fury?" Or: "Or: How can the point of views in Cindy Sherman's Untitled Film Stills be explained from analytical research on Hollywood films?"

​

Iconographic questions are also explanatory in nature. Iconography studies the depictions in the subject of an artwork in relation to the meaning as explicitly applied by the artist. The meaning of the work can be explained by seeking an explanation for the various visual elements.

 

Many explanatory questions posed by students come up short in terms of academic depth. For example, questions about the artist's intention, such as: "Why did artist X use…." or "What did artist X mean by artwork Y?" suggest that you want to get into the mind of the artist. Don't psychologize. To prevent this, you can look for a causal relationship that provides insight into your artwork without involving the artist's psyche.

Instead of: "What did artist X mean to say about the tension between the present and the past in artwork Y?" it is better to ask: "What socio-societal contexts can explain an aspect of tension between the present and the past in artwork Y by artist X?" By posing this question, you are looking for a causal relationship (the cause of the tension between the present and the past) without psychologizing. You can find the causal relationship by looking at certain characteristics of the artwork and by reviewing the existing literature.

Or, "Why did the characteristics of the snapshot change when artist X digitally edited photo Y?" With this question, you try to explain a change brought about by an adaptation by the artist without depending on the intention of the artist to answer it.

​

​

  • Defining Question

This question examines how a phenomenon relates to a wider debate. Through analysing a case you arrive at a working definition in which, on the basis of literature, you define which relationships your research subject has with the broader academic debate. From there, you can test your definition against other cases and observations. The bigger picture helps to clarify wherein and why certain aspects are relevant for gaining insight into your research object, but also wherein and why certain aspects of your research object deviate, so that you can come to a transparent and nuanced definition of your object.

 

This does not mean merely pointing out similarities or differences between phenomenon A and context B. The main goal is to find out how phenomenon A relates to the whole of context B. A comparative approach may therefore be a part of the answer to this question, but the comparison is not the main goal.

For example: "To what extent does the Villa Rotonda adhere to the rules for architecture that Palladio formulated in I quattro Libri dell’Architettura?" To answer this question, you have to compare the characteristics of the Villa Rotonda with the characteristics formulated by Palladio. You do this to define to what extent the Villa Rotonda can be considered a classical architectural structure, and how it deviates from that classification, to gain insight into the research object (and define it).

Or: "How do aspects X and Y from debate Z clarify characteristic A of artwork B?"

​

 

  • Comparative Question

A comparative question examines similarities and/or differences between two or more phenomena. For example, comparing artist A and B or comparing a theory and a work of art as a theoretical position. 

 

The comparison must have a significant purpose that goes beyond just comparing pictures or lists of characteristics. The comparison is not a goal in itself, but is always aimed at finding out more about your research subject. So, think of a good reason why you are going to compare and contrast. How will the comparison yield more knowledge about your object? When you compare two things, it must therefore be clear which of the two is your main subject. In that case, you use the comparison with the other research object to gain more knowledge about your main subject. So, preferably, there is a prioritization between the items to be compared.

For example: "How do artwork X and artwork Y differ from each other in terms of seriality?" This research question does not prioritize between the two works of art and suggests that the comparison itself is the goal. If artwork X is the subject of study, then you use artwork Y to learn more about X and therefore it is better to ask: "What does the difference in seriality between X and Y teach us about the recording of time in X?"

​

When the comparative question can be answered by means of a visual analysis or an inventory, the question remains at the level of preliminary research. An academically sound comparison goes deeper, serves a purpose and requires a literary review.

For example: "What insights do the classical designs of Madame Grès give into the designs of Mariano Fortuny that refer to Greek Antiquity?"

Or: "What is remarkable about Van Gogh's reception history in France when we study it against the backdrop of the reception of his work in the Netherlands?"

​

​

  • Theory-forming Question

Using this question, new theory is formed or shaped. 'Shaping' here stands for modelling, kneading or polishing existing theories. Some artworks or developments turn out to go against existing theories. A case study that leads to the need for refining or changing the existing view is called theory-building research. This provides new perspectives or more nuance. Of course, there is also research in which completely new theories are formulated, but that is rare.

For example: how does the debate surrounding author B's theory A on issue C relate to artwork D?

Or "How does the debate surrounding Tom Nichols' theory about the disappearance of the humanist narrative relate to Tintoretto's painting Poverty?"

Or: "How does the discussion about Kritische Gänge (1866) by Friedrich Vischer relate to the dichotomy between geometric and organic abstraction as later formulated by Clement Greenberg?"

Or: "To what nuances in the Classical Concept of Mimesis does an analysis of Rodin's bust of Camille Claudel (1911) lead?"

​

Theory-building questions can be art-philosophical in nature. But unlike the philosopher, who works from the fundamental assumptions of a theory, the art historian will mainly focus on art-historical and art-theoretical issues.

 

A common issue with theory-building questions is the searching for "depictions of discussions": researching whether an artwork fits well within a theory, or researching whether an artwork actually adheres to what the theory prescribes. When you do this, the artwork essentially becomes subordinate to the theory because you assume that the theory determines how you approach the artwork. For art historical research, it is more interesting to look at how an artwork can provide an incentive to add nuance to a particular theory.

For example: "How does artwork X fit in the theory Y of thinker Z?" prioritizes the theory over the artwork. You can put more emphasis on the artwork than on the theory by asking how the artwork requires modification of the theory: "To what nuances in the theory Y about [...] by thinker Z does an analysis of [the ... characteristics of] artwork X lead?"

Or: "What nuances in theory A about subject B by theoretician C become necessary through an analysis of artwork D?"

​

​

Other research questions

For art-historical research the following questions are (generally) not relevant:

  • Predictive Question ("What effect will the current budget cuts have on museums?")

  • Advisory Question ("What could museums do to attract more visitors?") 

  • Evaluating Question ("Did the new collection presentation attract more visitors?") 

 

These are questions that are generally used in statistical research. These types of questions are usually part of quantitative research, in which inferences are based on numbers in collected data. Art-historical research is generally qualitative research, in which inferences are based on critical analysis of the research material. 

 

The Indexing Question ("What themes can be found in Dutch inter-war paintings?") and the Descriptive Question ("How did Geertgen tot Sint Jans depict the theme of The Adoration of the Magi?") are indeed important for art-historical research, but they play a larger role in the preliminary research. These are questions that help map a phenomenon (‘who’, ‘what’, ‘which’, ‘when’, ‘where’, ‘how’, ‘what characteristics’), which usually does not require art-historical examination. Because you are only describing and indexing what you see, it is not sufficiently academic. For example: "What subjects did Picasso paint during his Blue Period?" The answer to this question would merely consist of a list of topics on the basis of a visual analysis. A better question, for example, would be: "How does Picasso’s Blue Period relate to the social-economic situation in Paris where he resided during that time?" 

 

If you have difficulty phrasing your research question, it is useful to formulate the problem or the topic in several different types of questions. Try to find out what kind of research each question implicates and, based on that, determine which type of question best suits your case study. 

.

​

​

1.5 Relationship between research question and research method

Explanatory question
Defining question
Comparative question
Theory-forming question
1.5 QUESTION vs. METHOD
Other questions

It is important to realize that the different questions each require their own type of research. That is to say that the research question and the research method intertwine. The method or approach follows from the type of question. The research question therefore not only determines the outcome of the research, but also the way in which you will conduct your research. That is why the formulation of the question is a delicate matter. The words you choose and with that the type of question you choose determines how you will relate to your sources and case studies. If you are going to compare and contrast, you must have several research objects. If you are going to explain, you will have to look for a causal relationship that exists around your case study. If you are going to define, you will have to determine the framework of definition. And if you are going to 'shape' a theory, you will have to illustrate the theory in question and the debate around it before you can add nuances to it with an analysis of an artwork.

​

1.6 WORD CHOICE

1.6 Word choices in research questions

As demonstrated, phrasing is crucial to the quality of a research question. Regardless of what research question you choose (explanatory, comparative, defining, etc.), it is important to phrase it very accurately. Some tips:

​

Do's 
  • Fully name the artist and work of art 

So not: "With what materials did he create this collage?". But rather: "With what materials did artist X (first and last name) create the collage Y (title of the work and the year)?"

​

  • Consider the number of possible answers that could arise from the question 

"What is the meaning of..." or "What is the source of inspiration for..." assumes one answer, while multiple possible answers can arise from a formulation such as: "To which insights does ... lead" or "On what did artist X base..."

The same goes for adding the word 'and'. When you include "and" in your question, you are actually adding a second research question. This means that you will have to propose more answers which requires a larger research. Only leave in such an addition if you are certain there is enough time and space to find those answers. You cannot leave one or more of the questions unanswered, so make sure your conclusion includes answers to all research questions posed. 

​

  • Be as specific as possible

"What similarities/differences exist between artwork A and artwork B?" does not make clear what kind of similarities or differences you will be looking for and, moreover, the question is too descriptive. Specify to: "What stylistic similarities/differences exist between artwork A and artwork B?" or: "What differences in reception history can be found between artwork A and artwork B?", etc. 

A term like ‘importance’, for example, is very problematic because the term is vague. Do you mean influence on, position relative to others, etc.? Think, therefore, about every word in the question and how it could be interpreted. Limit the possible interpretations as much as possible by specifying the terms to the concepts that you will be using.

​

  • Use academic phrasing. 

That is, formulate a question in such a way that the answers become verifiable and objective. Avoid colloquial and cumbersome descriptions such as: "How did painter X roughly developed over time?", "Why are there endless variations on this theme?", or "Why do art historians disagree so vehemently about the interpretation of painting Y?". Change this to: "How did painter X develop his stylistic aspects in the period Y-Z?", or: "Why do variations A, B and C on theme X exist?" and: "Why do art historians A, B and C differ in their opinion about the interpretation of painting Y?"

For more tips on academic formulations, see Writing Styles, Academic texts.

​

  • Vary your formulation

Challenge yourself to find the briefest formulation possible. You can do this by writing down a list of all your ideas for the research question using different words each time. While shifting words around, you will discover which terms are the keywords of your research; they move to each different formulation. Other words disappear or seem to fit better when you find a synonym. Also try to play with the weight of the question words. For example, with an explanatory question, most are inclined to choose 'why,' but force yourself to come up with different question word; what difference in nuance does that produce?

​

  • A research question does not always have to be formulated as a question

A non-interrogative sentence can also be used to incorporate a research question into the text, for instance: "The first subquestion focuses on which...", or: "This research will make clear which insights...". 

 

​

Don'ts
  • Do not psychologize

When you question why an artists did something or what the artist was trying to say with an artwork, you try to get into the mind of the artist. If you want to know what someone was thinking, feeling or what drove them to do something, you are practising psychology instead of art history. The private world of the artist cannot be traced with art-historical research. Another issue is that to answer such questions you are completely dependent on comments from the artist (comments which are often made at a later date on the basis of a distorted memory). You are solely dependent on one source, namely a statement by the artist, which is also subjective in nature. The conclusions of your research will stand much firmer if they are based on various objective sources. You can supplement your argument with a statement or opinion of the artist, but your research should not depend on it entirely.

For example: “What was artist X trying to say with artwork Y?”. Or: “What message did artist X want to convey through the use of material Y?”. A better option would be: “What does the use of material Y by artist X add to the possibilities in portraying Z? "

 

  • Avoid terms such as original, important, meaning

Terms such as 'original', 'originality', 'groundbreaking', 'important', and 'meaning' can be problematic in a research question. Usually because these terms come from a very specific field of study. If that field is not exactly what your research question focuses on, then you should be careful with using these terms.

 

Questions of originality ("it's unique"), pushing the boundaries and importance we know from art criticism, for example. In that field, it is customary to assign value judgements to artworks, but in academics we prefer to avoid such judgements because they are personal in nature and are therefore difficult to objectify.

Examples:

Original

"Did Niki de Saint-Phalle work with epoxy in an original way?" It is better to question, for example, how her use of epoxy compares to the traditional casting of sculpture. By formulating your research question in this way, you avoid assigning a personal value judgement while still investigating how the casting of epoxy relates to the frameworks in which De Saint-Phalle operated.

Groundbreaking

"How groundbreaking has artwork X by artist Y been for the medium of photography?" The extent to which something is considered groundbreaking depends on a personal viewpoint and is therefore, like originality, a question that is difficult to substantiate academically.

Meaning

We know questions about the meaning of an artwork mainly from iconography. In the iconography, fixed parameters (visual elements) have been defined, which you can use to assign meaning to a depicted scene. If you don't want to engage in iconographic research, you have to be careful with questions about meaning as you'll soon be asking about a "gut feeling." With these questions, the researcher is asking what this artwork expresses to them, but this does not transcend the level of the personal interest or feeling.

​

A few bad examples:

  • "What is the importance of genre works in the Dutch Golden Age?"

Importance is a vague term. What exactly do you mean by genre works? Which period of the Golden Age will you be researching? 

  • "Does analog photography have similarities with the medium of painting?"

This question could be answered with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’. This can be avoided by asking a more complex questions that engages with the ‘how’ and the ‘why’ of the issue: "What characteristics does analog photography borrow from the medium of painting?", or "Why does analog photography borrow from the medium of painting?", etc. 

  • "What influence did the primitive art have on the visual art of the 20th century?"

This question does have a limited time period, but this time period is still too broad. Again, it is unclear what is meant by some words. What do you mean by primitive art? A better question would be: "How did Picasso come into contact with the primitive African art in the beginning of the 20th century and how did he incorporate it into his paintings?"

Do's
Don'ts

1.7 Academia

1.7 ACADEMIA
1.8 RELATIONSHIP SUB- AND MAIN QUESTION
Overlap between research questions

In practice, research questions are more fluid than the definition of the above-mentioned categories suggest. The question types can intertwine. For example, to answer a defining question, you may have to partially answer a comparative question. Or you may have to work on the definition before you are able to answer a theory-forming question. Such a 'sliding scale' between types of research questions often emerges in the sub-questions of which the main question consists.

For example: With a defining question you can analyse how your case study relates to a larger whole. Suppose you are questioning whether two case studies relate to a larger whole, then you will start out with a definition and then the research will slide towards a comparison.

 

Two-stage-to-orbit

In practice, a research question is rarely presented out of context. The question is usually introduced with an opening statement, or with an opening paragraph in more complex studies, before the specific question about the case study is asked. For example, the 'launch' of the research question often takes place in two stages; the introductory stage and the stage in which the question is asked. For example, in the introductory stage you can, discuss the 'why'; the reason for doing the research by, for instance, naming the characteristics of the artwork that inspired your research. The second stage of the 'launch' contains the 'what': what exactly will you be doing? That stage includes the actual research question. See Introduction for a more detailed explanation of the distribution of the different components of the introduction.

​

​

1.8 Relationship between subquestions and main question

First, read Year 1, Dividing into subquestions

​

The main question is divided into different subquestions. It is wise to formulate the main question and subquestions at the same time to form a coherent whole. The subquestions logically succeed each other and together give a complete answer to the main question. In this way, the main question is an umbrella for the different subquestions. The structure of your paper is based on the sequence of your subquestions. 

Start each sub-research (so each chapter) with a few paragraphs in which you introduce the subquestion and end each sub-research with a concluding statement regarding the subquestion.

​

Some problems could arise that can be solved by shifting the distribution of the topic across the subquestions.

 

1. The subquestions are related to the topic but are irrelevant to the main question.

For example: Main question: "How did feminist thinkers react to Manet’s painting Olympia?". Subquestion: "Which contemporary artists have been influenced by Manet’s painting Olympia?" This subquestion is related to the topic but is beyond the scope of the main question. Therefore, change the subquestion or widen the main question if you think this topic is essential to your research.

​

2 One of the subquestions is the same as the main question.

When you are trying to arrive at the main question via a logical succession of subquestions, it is possible that the last subquestion coincides with the main question. If that happens, realise that the goal is not to arrive at the main question via the subquestions, but rather that the main question should be divided into different subquestions. Otherwise, the first subquestions are not relevant to the research and only function as a way of introducing the topic. So make sure that all subquestions support the main question.

Example: Main question: "What is the meaning of the monkey in this painting?". Subquestion 1: "What is depicted in this painting?". Subquestion 2: "What role does the monkey play in contemporary paintings?". Subquestion 3: "What is the meaning of the depicted monkey?".

​

3. These subquestions individually answer part of the main question, but together do not fully answer the main question.

Example: Main question: "Why do author A and author B differ in their opinion about the iconography of painting X?". Subquestion 1: "What is depicted in painting X?". Subquestion 2: “How does author A interpret this?". Subquestion 3: “How does author B interpret this?”. Here, an explanation for the difference of opinion between author A and author B is missing. Now, only the nature of the differences has been outlined without engaging with the ‘why’ from the main question. A possible solution is to expand the number of subquestions, or to widen the scope of the existing subquestions by asking: "How does author A support his interpretation and from what context can this choice be explained?" and "How does author B support his interpretation and from what context can this choice be explained?" 

 

​

1.9 Adjustments to the research question during the writing process 

Have you found information during the research or writing process that turns everything on its head? Stay flexible and don’t be afraid to change your questions. When doing so, try to - if possible - stick to your topic and own perspective.

1.9 ADJUSTMENTS DURING WRITING
bottom of page