Individuals as the unit of analysis

When the purpose of research is to say something about individuals, they become the unit of analysis. Individuals are the most frequent unit of analysis. They may be any age, either gender, or become the units of analysis because they have a common characteristic. Primary, intermediate and secondary students were the units of analysis in a trend study by Badri and Burchinal (1985). Many studies are based on collecting data from university students, who then become the unit of analysis. Cook (2001), for example, investigated the attitudes of Egyptian university students toward Islam and higher education; Had-Elzein and Ahmed (2001) obtained data on perceptions and vision of peace from Sudanese university students. Married women were the unit of analysis in the Sudan Fertility Survey (1982). Mageed, Sulima and Kawther (2000) collected data about attitudes toward female genital mutilation from adult men and women. Agricultural technical workers were the unit of analysis in a study of worker satisfaction in Kenya (Mulinge and Mueller, 1998). Muneer (1989) selected farmers, who became the unit of analysis, in his study of the role of cooperatives in western Sudan. Khalafalla (2001) selected policy-makers as her sample who also became her unit of analysis.    

Groups as the unit of analysis

Research is often conducted by collecting and analyzing data for groups of people. When the purpose is to describe two or more persons as a unit, these groups become the unit of analysis. Households, consisting of various numbers of persons, often are used as the unit of analysis. Examples include the research by Julia and Ridha (2001) on Iraqi farm families and research by Davidson (1972) on changes in household life in the Nuba Mountains. Households were the unit of analysis in an extensive study of year-long spending patterns among farm families in Sierra Leon (King and Byerlee, 1977). The sample used by Grotberg and Badri (1986) consisted of intact families with a child not older than five and one-half years. The mother-child pairs in these families became the unit of analysis in this study. Other units of analysis at the group level include friendship groups, clubs, social groups, and groups of street children.

Organizations as the unit of analysis

Research often is directed at learning about organizations, such as businesses, firms, ministries of government, universities, political parties, religious bodies, or military units. Although data about each organization may be obtained by interviewing members of an organization, the data would be used to describe and compare features of each organization. For example, Gimbel and associates (2002) studied job satisfaction in community-based organizations. They collected data from employees but analyzed their data in terms of characteristics of the organizations. Mohamed (2002) analyzed operations in a sample of 150 government divisions in the United Arab Emirates. In a study of safety programs, Vredenburgh (2002) collected data about practices in 62 hospitals. These are only a few of the many management studies based on organizations as the unit of analysis.  

Geographical places as the unit of analysis

Places, such as where people live, can also become the focus of study and therefore be used as the unit of analysis. Fishing villages in Uganda were the unit of analysis in a socio-economic investigation by Namara (1997). Cities, provinces, and rural versus urban areas are used as the unit of analysis in most reports issued by   international organizations. Countries frequently are used as the unit of analysis. Bulluck (1986) compared the extent to which developing countries meet the social needs of citizens. Countries were also used in comparing   infant mortality rates throughout sub-Saharan Africa (Frey and Field, 2000). Wang (1996) examined the extent to which women's reproductive rights were protected in 101 countries.