Explainer · Plain-language

What Is Action Research? Cycle, Types & Examples | CASRAI

Action research is a cyclical, practitioner-engaged research methodology that aims to improve practice while simultaneously generating knowledge. Researchers and practitioners work collaboratively to identify problems, implement changes, and reflect on outcomes.

CASRAI plain-language explainers — clear answers to recurring research-administration questions

The step most authors miss

Doing CRediT right? Don’t stop at the statement.

A CRediT statement credits you inside one paper. The recognition CRediT was built for happens when those roles are tied to you, persistently. Sign in with your ORCID — free — and claim your CRediT contributions on casrai.org, the home of the standard. They become a verified, portable part of your identity, not a line that disappears into one PDF.

Free: claim your contributions, then export a journal-ready CRediT statement, schema.org structured data, JATS XML, CSV or BibTeX — and preview your public profile. A membership publishes that profile publicly and verifies the journals you serve.

Kurt Lewin and the origins of action research

Action research was first named and theorised by the social psychologist Kurt Lewin in 1946 in a paper titled "Action research and minority problems." Lewin was responding to what he saw as the failure of purely academic social science to address real social problems: knowledge produced in the laboratory rarely found its way into practice. His solution was a cyclical model integrating research and action — a spiral of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting — in which practitioners and researchers collaborate throughout. This immediately distinguished action research from the hypothetico-deductive model, in which researchers test theory on a population and "apply" findings afterwards.

The action research cycle and its variants

The action research cycle is iterative and self-correcting. The foundational steps are: (1) identify a problem or improvement opportunity; (2) plan an intervention; (3) act — implement the plan; (4) observe — collect data on outcomes; (5) reflect — evaluate what happened and revise understanding; (6) re-plan — begin the next cycle with a refined approach. Kemmis and McTaggart (1988) formalised this as a four-step spiral (plan, act and observe, reflect, re-plan) that became standard in educational research. Elliot (1991) developed a more fine-grained model with reconnaissance phases. In nursing, the Stringer (2014) "look–think–act" model is widely used.

Participatory action research and emancipatory traditions

Participatory action research (PAR) extends Lewin’s model by treating community members not merely as participants but as co-researchers who help define the problem, collect data, and interpret findings. PAR is associated with Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy and is widely used in community health, international development, and social justice research. Habermas’s distinction between technical, practical, and emancipatory knowledge (interests) maps onto three traditions: technical action research (improving efficiency), practical action research (improving understanding and professional judgement), and emancipatory action research (challenging unjust structures and relations). Stephen Kemmis and Robin McTaggart developed the emancipatory tradition in educational research.

Quality criteria and relationship to traditional research

Action research is assessed by different quality criteria from conventional research. Validity is replaced by concepts such as trustworthiness (Guba & Lincoln), workability (does it work in practice?), and catalytic validity (does the research motivate participants to change their understanding and practices?). Anderson and Herr (1999) proposed five validity criteria specific to insider action research: outcome validity, process validity, democratic validity, catalytic validity, and dialogic validity. Action research is contrasted with traditional research on several dimensions: it is iterative rather than linear, practice-embedded rather than detached, and aims at transformation rather than (only) description or prediction.

Key facts

At a glance

Definition: Cyclical, practitioner-engaged methodology — improves practice + generates knowledge
Originator: Kurt Lewin (1946) — "Action research and minority problems"
Core cycle: Plan → Act → Observe → Reflect → Re-plan (Kemmis & McTaggart 1988)
PAR: Participatory action research — community members as co-researchers
Traditions: Technical, practical, emancipatory (Habermas-influenced typology)
Disciplines: Education, nursing, community development, organisational studies
Quality: Trustworthiness, workability, catalytic validity — not conventional validity

Common misconceptions

What people often get wrong

Often heard: Action research is just "applied research" with a different name.

Actually: No — action research has distinctive features: it is cyclical (iterative), practitioner-engaged, participatory, and aimed at transformation. Applied research can still follow a conventional linear design; action research is structurally different.

Often heard: Action research lacks rigour because it is not objective.

Actually: No — action research uses its own rigour criteria: trustworthiness, workability, catalytic validity. Rigour in action research means systematic documentation, reflective practice, transparency, and peer review of the process, not detachment or objectivity.

Often heard: Action research can only be done by insider (practitioner) researchers.

Actually: No — action research can be led by outsider researchers working collaboratively with practitioners, or by teams combining insiders and outsiders. The distinction between insider and outsider action research is analytically important but neither is more legitimate.

Going deeper