Start with the experience you want to understand
A qualitative research question asks how people experience, interpret or respond to something. “Does peer feedback improve writing?” asks about an effect. “How do students make sense of peer feedback on their writing?” asks about perspectives and processes. Both may be useful questions, but they call for different kinds of evidence.
SPIDER is a framework for making qualitative questions more specific. Its letters stand for Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation and Research type. It can also help organize a search for existing studies. You do not have to force all five elements into one sentence; use them to check what you need to know and what you can leave open.
Work through the five SPIDER elements
Sample identifies whose perspectives matter. This might be first-year university students, classroom teachers or people using a particular service. Add context when it affects the question, but avoid narrowing the group without a reason. “Students” may be too broad; “first-year students in writing seminars” gives a clearer starting point.
Phenomenon of Interest names the experience, practice or situation you want to explore. In the writing example, it could be receiving comments from classmates. Evaluation describes what you hope to learn about that phenomenon: perhaps how students interpret the comments, which comments they find usable, or what makes responding to them difficult. Evaluation here does not have to mean assigning a score or deciding whether something works.
Design refers to how relevant evidence might be gathered, such as interviews, focus groups, observations or analysis of written reflections. Research type signals the kind of inquiry you need, commonly a qualitative study or a mixed-methods study with a qualitative component. These two elements are especially helpful when planning a study or searching for sources. If your question is still exploratory, you can consider possible designs without committing to one too early.
Build a question from a broad topic
Suppose your starting topic is “peer feedback in university writing courses.” It leaves several decisions unresolved: whose experience matters, what aspect of feedback you mean and what you want to understand. A SPIDER sketch could look like this in prose: the sample is first-year students in writing seminars; the phenomenon is receiving written peer comments on a draft; the evaluation focuses on how students interpret and use those comments; the possible design is interviews alongside examples of commented drafts; and the research type is qualitative.
That sketch leads to a question such as: “How do first-year students in writing seminars interpret and use written peer comments when revising a draft?” The question identifies a group and a concrete activity while leaving room for different accounts. It does not assume that students welcome the comments, use every suggestion or revise in the same way.
You can adjust the question to match your real interest. If uncertainty about comments matters most, ask, “How do first-year students decide which written peer comments to act on when revising a draft?” If classroom discussion matters more than written comments, change the phenomenon rather than trying to cover both. A good question is focused enough to guide inquiry but open enough to let unexpected findings emerge.
Use the framework to plan a source search
SPIDER can help you identify search terms without requiring every source to match every detail of your proposed study. For the example above, you might group terms for the sample (“first-year students” or “undergraduates”), the phenomenon (“peer feedback” or “peer review”) and the evaluation (“student perceptions,” “interpretation” or “revision”). Terms such as “interviews” and “qualitative” may help when you specifically need studies using those approaches.
Search language varies between authors. A relevant study might say “response to peer review” rather than “use of peer comments,” or include students from several year groups. If a search returns too little, broaden one element at a time and check whether the results still speak to your question. If it returns too much, add a meaningful context or a closer description of the experience—not just more words.
Check the question before you settle on it
Read your draft question and ask what a participant could say in response. If the question can only be answered yes or no, it may need a “how,” “what” or “in what ways.” Check for assumptions, too. “Why do students ignore peer feedback?” presumes they ignore it; “How do students decide whether to use peer feedback?” allows a wider range of answers.
Finally, make sure the scope fits your purpose. A question about every type of feedback across all university courses may be difficult to investigate or review coherently. A question tied to one kind of feedback and a clearly described group is easier to pursue. SPIDER is a planning aid, not a rulebook: keep the elements that clarify your inquiry, revise those that restrict it unnecessarily, and let your question remain open to what the evidence reveals.
