Research Gap Finder

Start narrower than feels natural. A broad area such as 'digital marketing' produces gaps too general to carry a thesis, while 'influencer credibility and purchase intention among Tier-2 city consumers in India' lets the tool reason about which relationships, populations and methods are under-studied. Use the 'What have you already explored?' field to list the studies and angles you already know, so the suggestions go beyond them.

Research gaps come in recognisable types. An empirical gap means a relationship has not been tested, or has produced conflicting results; a contextual gap means it has been studied elsewhere but not in your setting, sector or country; a methodological gap means previous studies share a design weakness, such as relying only on cross-sectional self-report data; a theoretical gap means an existing theory has not been extended or combined in a particular way. Committees find empirical and methodological gaps easier to defend than purely contextual ones.

Every candidate gap must be verified before it goes into a synopsis. Search Scopus or Google Scholar for the last five years using the constructs and context the gap names, read the future-research sections of the most recent papers, and check Shodhganga for Indian theses on the same topic. If you find recent studies that already close the gap, refine it rather than abandon it — often the remaining gap lies in a different population, a mediator or a longitudinal design.