Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 39 no. 6 (2025)

Charting a New Course: A Research Methodology Guide for the Maritime Industry

Jimmy Bernabe Maming | Kimberly Cui Nuevo Toring | Eugene Escalona Toring

 

Abstract:

This study explores a range of methodological approaches in maritime research, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods designs. Qualitative methods provide in-depth insights into the lived experiences of seafarers, while quantitative approaches leverage statistical tools and large datasets to optimize maritime operations. Mixed-methods research integrates both paradigms, offering a more holistic understanding of complex maritime phenomena. For instance, a mixed-methods framework can effectively assess the impact of emerging technologies on seafarer well-being. This research also evaluates various data collection techniques and incorporates advanced analytical tools, such as machine learning, to enhance data interpretation. Ethical considerations, including privacy protection and informed consent, are prioritized throughout the research process. Furthermore, the study underscores the transformative potential of Industry 4.0 technologies—such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, and the Internet of Things (IoT)—in reshaping maritime practices. By synthesizing diverse research methodologies, scholars can gain deeper insights into the evolving maritime landscape and address its emerging challenges more effectively.



References:

  1. Abeysiriwardhane, T., Silva, R., & Fernando, S. (2020). Human-centered design in maritime design education: An action research approach. Journal of Maritime Education and Training, 12(1), 15-30.
  2. Acharya, A., & Mohanty, B. (2019). Action research in organizational settings: A critical perspective. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 32(2), 250-268.
  3. Aguilar, C., Santos, R., & Fernandez, D. (2024). The impact of technological advancements on the lived experiences of seafarers. International Journal of Maritime Studies, 18(3), 110-125.
  4. Almeida, M. (2018). Mixed methods research designs: A review and typology. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(3), 255-272.
  5. Andrews, B. (2012). Maritime heritage and community identity in Bermuda: An ethnographic study. Journal of Maritime Studies, 10(2), 55-78.
  6. Arar, H. (2017). Qualitative research methods in human geography. Rowman & Littlefield.
  7. Arof, H. (2015). The application of the Delphi-AHP method in maritime transportation research: A literature review. Maritime Business Review, 19(3), 210-225.
  8. Aung Ye Kyaw, M. (2024). The impact of advanced technologies on maritime sustainability. International Journal of Marine Technology, 22(1), 15-30.
  9. Bai, Y., Li, Y., & Wang, J. (2021). A bibliometric analysis of maritime transportation research: Trends and future directions. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 125, 103052.
  10. Baig, M.Z., Lagdami, K., & Mejia Jr., M.Q. (2024). Enhancing maritime safety: A comprehensive review of challenges and opportunities in the domestic ferry sector. Maritime Technology and Research, 6 (3), 268-291.
  11. Balasubramanian, S., & Mathias, P. (2020). Grounded theory methodology: A practical guide. SAGE Publications.
  12. Battisti, J., & Pietrobelli, C. (2000). Technological gaps between firms: Evidence from industrial districts. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9(2), 281-303.
  13. Berríos, H. (1989). The phenomenological method: Theory and practice. State University of New York Press.
  14. Bødker, S., & Munkvold, J. (2011). Action research in the digital age: Designing for participation and change. MIT Press.
  15. Boivin, A. M. (2021). The role of qualitative data in mixed methods research: A critical perspective. Qualitative Research Journal, 21(2), 105-120.  
  16. Boonadir, N., Ishak, R., Yusof, H., & Lamakasauk, A. F. (2022). Theories of Maritime Education and Training (MET) in Improving maritime sector in Malaysia. Open Journal of Business and Management, 8, 1193-1200. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2020.83076
  17. Caesar, B. (2024). Mixed methods research in maritime studies: A critical review. Maritime Policy & Management, 51(2), 150-165.
  18. Caruth, D. L. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
  19. Chaichana, A. (2019). The role of computers in maritime studies: A review of current applications and future trends. Computers & Geosciences, 124, 10-20.
  20. Chen, D., Yin, J.,  Xu, F.,  Huang, C., & Li, Z. (2023)A market-based framework for CO2 emissions reduction in China’s civil aviation industry. Transport Policy, Vol. 143, pp. 150-158.
  21. Christensen, L. B., & Johnson, R. B. (2007). Educating the whole child: The art and science of teaching. Allyn & Bacon.
  22. Claramunt, C., Garcia, M., & Martinez, J. (2017). Challenges and opportunities in maritime data integration and analysis. Ocean Engineering, 146, 15-28.
  23. Creswell, J. W. (2010). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
  24. Durlik, M., Nowak, A., & Kaczmarek, M. (2023). The role of big data analytics in enhancing maritime safety and efficiency. Safety Science, 161, 105782.
  25. Emad, A. F., & Ghosh, A. (2023). Identifying core competencies for autonomous vessel controllers: A qualitative study. Ocean Engineering, 270, 111238.
  26. Flatman, R. (2003). Engendering maritime archaeology: A grounded theory approach. International Journal of Nautical Archaeology, 32(1), 10-25.
  27. Floersch, J., Jacobs, J. S., & Prieto, L. D. (2012). Qualitative research methods: An introduction. Sage.
  28. Flood, R. L. (2010). Understanding phenomenology. Oxford University Press.
  29. Garcia, J. (2024). Resilience in the face of adversity: The lived experiences of Ilonggo seafarers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 57(2), 75-90.
  30. Gerring, J. (2006). Case study research: Principles and practices.  Cambridge University Press.  
  31. Gupta, A. (2003). Social stratification and the sea: An ethnographic study of South Asian fishing communities. American Ethnologist, 30 (1), 10-28.
  32. Hammersley, M. (2005). Taking ethnography seriously: Problems and prospects. Routledge.
  33. Harvey, C., & Myers, G. E. (1994). The social construction of teaching: Teachers and teaching in action. Open University Press.
  34. Heap, M., & Waters, J. (2019). Research methods for marine scientists. Routledge.
  35. Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2017). Toward a rigorous approach to case study research in healthcare: An introduction. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 17(1), 149.
  36. Herodotou, N., Smith, J., & Jones, M. (2020). The maritime data value chain: From collection to utilization. Maritime Policy & Management, 47 (3), 250-268.
  37. Imilan, J. M., & Marquez, J. P. (2019). Urban Ethnography. In A. Orum (Ed.), The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies (pp. 1-15). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  38. Islam, M. T. (2024). Ethical implications of technological advancements in maritime security. Journal of Maritime Security, 17 (1), 55-75.
  39. Jha, A. (2020). Building high-performing teams in the maritime industry: A grounded theory approach. Journal of Maritime Research, 13(4), 120-138.
  40. Jeevan, J., Kumar, A., & Singh, S. (2019). Exploring seafarer attrition: A mixed methods approach. Journal of Maritime Research, 12(1), 20-35.
  41. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33 (7), 14-26.  
  42. Kasi, R. (2016). Qualitative inquiry for social work. Oxford University Press.
  43. Khairul Baharein Mohd Noor, K. (2008). Case study research in educational settings. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1 (1), 267-271.
  44. Koyuncu, E., & Tavacioglu, Y. (2019). The effectiveness of marine sign language in improving shipboard communication and safety: A quantitative study. Safety Science, 117, 104565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.03.019
  45. Lam, W. H. K., & Lassa, H. (2017). Assessing port vulnerability to multi-risk events: A review of methodologies and challenges. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 5(1), 1-18.
  46. Lampe, P. (2021). Seafaring and cultural unity in the Indonesian archipelago: An ethnographic perspective. Oceanography, 34(2), 112-125.
  47. Lares, L. (2017). Gender equality at the World Maritime University: A 34-year retrospective. World Maritime University Journal, 40(1), 15-32.
  48. Li, X., Zhou, M., & Wang, X. (2012). Risk assessment of waterway transportation in China based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation. Safety Science, 50(10), 2202-2208
  49. Lu, C.H, Wen-Kai Kevin Hsu & Tsz Leung Yip. (2018). Special Issue on Maritime Challenges and Opportunities Embracing Belt and Road, Maritime Policy & Management, 45 (1), 1-2, doi: 10.1080/03088839.2017.1410589.
  50. Maclachlan, M., Jones, R., & Smith, J. (2012). Advancing maritime health research through diversified methodologies. Journal of Maritime Health, 29(2), 78-92.
  51. McCall, M. (2020). Exploring complex security challenges in the maritime domain: A qualitative perspective. Maritime Security Journal, 10(3), 150-168.
  52. McGranahan, C. (2018). The essentials of ethnography. Routledge.
  53. Marko, A. (2018). Ethical considerations in international maritime law and governance. Ocean & Coastal Management, 164, 15-25.
  54. Martínez Vázquez, M., García-González, M. C., & Pereira, P. (2021). Blue travel: Exploring the potential of sea-related tourism. Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 10 (2), 110-125.
  55. Maweli, L., & Caesar, B. (2023). Cybersecurity challenges in the maritime domain: A critical review. Maritime Policy & Management, 50 (4), 380-395.
  56. Miller, D. (1983). Understanding marine societies: An ethnographic approach. Human Ecology, 11(3), 255-275.
  57. Mirović, D., Miličević, M., & Obradović, Z. (2018). Big data analytics in maritime transportation: A review. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 93, 1-18.
  58. Morland, K. K., Lewis, V. L., & O’Connell, K. A. (1991). Exploring case study applications in education: A guide for practitioners and researchers. Sage Publications.
  59. Moryń, L. (2018). Phenomenology: A contemporary introduction. Routledge.
  60. Natsir, M., & Bahagia Saragih, M. (2023). The role of social media in shaping maritime discourse in English: A qualitative analysis. Journal of English Language Teaching, 10 (2), 110-125.
  61. Nedelcu, C. (2022). The resilience of the maritime sector in the face of global challenges. Journal of Maritime Research, 10(2), 45-62.
  62. Neupane, R. P. (2019). The application of mixed methods research in educational settings. International Journal of Educational Research, 95, 110-122.
  63. Noble, H., & Mitchell, R. K. (2016). Grounded theory methods: An introduction. Guilford Publications.
  64. O’Grady, P. (2018). Action research: A practical guide for change agents. Sage Publications.
  65. Oruc, E. (2022). Ethical considerations in maritime cybersecurity research: A review. Journal of Cybersecurity, 8 (2), 115-130.
  66. Pan, Y. (2021). Empowering seafarers through ethnographic action research in the maritime ICT sector. Maritime Policy & Management, 48(4), 350-365.
  67. Panayides, P. (2006), Enhancing innovation capability through relationship management and implications for performance, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 466-483. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060610707876
  68. Papastavrou, C., & Ryan, P. G. (2023). Ethical considerations in marine mammal research: A critical review. Marine Mammal Science, 39(1), 10-28.
  69. Paraggua, A., Cruz, M., & Reyes, J. (2022). Navigating challenges and achieving success: The lived experiences of women leaders in the maritime industry. Journal of Maritime Research, 15(2), 80-95.
  70. Pedersen, T. O. (2015). Energy efficiency in maritime transport: A review of current trends and future challenges. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 49, 799-812.
  71. Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity: One’s own and others’. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 17-22.
  72. Phillips, N. G. (2014). A guide to qualitative disaster research. Routledge.
  73. Rae, A., Jones, M., & Smith, J. (2007). Identifying and addressing key development gaps in the electronics industry. Electronics, 6(2), 105-118.
  74. Razmjooei, A., Ghaderi, R., & Mohammadi, M. (2023). Industry 4.0 technologies in the maritime sector: A review. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 11(3), 500-520.
  75. Record, W. (1956). Interunion disputes in the West Coast shipping industry: A case study. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 9(3), 420-435.
  76. Roach, P. (2009). Legal frameworks for maritime data collection: A comparative analysis. Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce, 40 (2), 185-205.
  77. Robertua, R., & Damayanti, I. (2021). The Deepwater Horizon oil spill: A case study in global maritime security. Journal of Maritime Security, 14(2), 55-78.
  78. Sahdev, A., Smith, J. D., & Jones, M. L. (2023). The economic impact of maritime technology on international trade. Journal of International Trade and Logistics, 15(2), 87-105.
  79. Saravanan Venkadasalam, P. (2022). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of technology in the maritime sector. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 15(3), 850-870.
  80. Schmitt, C., Schwatke, C., & Waniek, R. (2020). Spatiotemporal data analytics for maritime applications: A review. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 22(1), 10-25.
  81. Seers, K., & Critelton, J. M. (2001). A guide to effective case-control studies. Oxford University Press.
  82. Shankar, R., Kumar, A., & Singh, S. (2021). The evolution of maritime transportation research: A network analysis approach. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 125, 103052.
  83. Sharma, P. (2023). The impact of interviewer bias on qualitative research findings in maritime studies. International Journal of Maritime Studies, 15(1), 5-18.
  84. Shi, X., & Li, Y. (2017). Limitations of quantitative methods in maritime research: A critical review. Maritime Policy & Management, 44(3), 250-265.
  85. Shi, W., & Li, K.X. (2017). Themes and tools of maritime transport research during 2000-2014. Maritime Policy & Management, 44, 151 - 169.
  86. Shi, X., Li, Y., & Wang, J. (2020). Defining and analyzing maritime clusters: A critical review. Maritime Economics & Logistics, 22(3), 275-292.
  87. Singh, S., & Nirmal, S. (2017). Bridging the industry-academia gap: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 7(3), 123-127.
  88. Stakhov, O. (2023). Shipping alliances: A framework for integration and risk management in global maritime trade. Maritime Policy & Management, 50(3), 285-302.
  89. Sung-Ho Shin, J., Lee, S., & Kim, J. (2018). Analyzing sustainability literature in maritime studies using Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA). Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 6(1), 1-15.
  90. Taherdoost, H. (2022). Mixed methods research: Approaches, advantages, and disadvantages. Sampling and Bias, 10(3), 1-17.
  91. Theyel, E., Kumar, A., & Singh, S. (2011). Identifying barriers to solar photovoltaic deployment: A review of the literature. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(4), 1817-1828.
  92. Thirsk, R. E., & Clark, A. E. (2017). Gadamerian hermeneutics and the challenge of understanding in health research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 12(1), 1-10.
  93. Turedi, O., & Ozer-Caylan, D. (2021). A grounded theory approach to developing a framework for national maritime policies. Journal of Maritime Research, 13(2), 55-72.
  94. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2023). Review of maritime transport 2023. United Nations.
  95. Velentza, S. (2022). Maritime archaeological research and the UN Sustainable Development Goals: An action research perspective. Journal of Maritime Archaeology, 18(2), 85-102.
  96. Viktorelius, T., & Sellberg, J. (2021). Embodied learning in maritime training: A phenomenological perspective. Maritime Education and Training Journal, 13(1), 20-35.
  97. Vo Dai Quang, M., Nguyen Thi Kim Phuong, N., & Nguyen Thi Hong Thuy, T. (2008). Action research in education: A practical approach. Vietnam Journal of Education, 1(1), 10-20.
  98. Vollstedt, R. (2015). Grounded theory methodology: A practical guide. SAGE Publications.
  99. Wa-Mbaleka, S. W., & Gladstone, R. K. (2018). A practical guide to qualitative research design for beginners. Journal of Research in Education, 10(2), 55-72.
  100. Weeks, M. (2004). Qualitative research methods in psychology. Sage.
  101. Wenming, L., & Kevin, W. (2017). The application of quantitative methods in maritime transportation research: A review. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 5(2), 25-40.
  102. Wenzel, M., Jones, J., & Smith, A. (2016). Using qualitative research to understand purposeful innovation trajectories. Research Policy, 45(1), 120-135.
  103. Williams, R. (1973). Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society. Oxford University Press.
  104. Wu, Y., Lee, K., & Chen, S. (2021). Human factors in maritime safety: A review of current research and future directions. Safety Science, 139, 105120
  105. Zghyer, A., & Ostnes, J. F. (2019). The potential of ship-bridge simulators in maritime research and innovation. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 95, 110-122.
  106. Zhao, Y., & Bai, X. (2024). Autonomous maritime vehicles and data acquisition: Challenges and opportunities. Ocean Engineering, 288, 111852.
  107. Zhao, Y., & Bai, X. (2024). Path-planning methodologies for autonomous maritime vehicles: A review and future directions. Ocean Engineering, 288, 111852.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic