Limitations of the Study

This study acknowledges several limitations related to data collection, methodological design, and representation. These limitations are important for understanding the scope of the findings and for situating the results within their appropriate analytical context.

Methodological Constraints

The quantitative component of the study relied exclusively on the Kobo Toolbox platform for survey administration and data collection. While Kobo is a widely accepted digital data collection tool, its structured format imposes certain constraints. Survey questions, by design, require predefined response options or concise open-ended inputs. As a result, complex emotions, deeply personal experiences, and context-specific feelings expressed by respondents could not always be fully articulated or captured in their intended depth. In several instances, respondents’ lived realities extended beyond the available response categories, which may have led to a partial representation of their actual perceptions and emotional experiences related to political participation, safety, and exclusion.

The study initially aimed to collect 500 valid survey responses. During field implementation, the total number of submissions increased to 505 due to overlapping field timelines and methodological adjustments during data collection. However, during the data validation and verification process, one response was found to be missing because of a technical limitation within the Kobo system. Consequently, the final cleaned and verified dataset consisted of 504 survey responses. All survey data underwent a rigorous cleaning process, including the identification of inconsistencies, removal of incomplete entries, and verification of logical coherence, before being analyzed using the Jamovi statistical software. While these steps strengthened data reliability, minor data loss due to technical limitations remains a constraint.

Representation Gaps

Despite efforts to ensure geographic and demographic diversity, representation gaps may persist. Some minority and marginalized communities, particularly those residing in remote areas or in politically sensitive environments, may have been underrepresented. Factors such as limited access, security concerns, fear of retribution, and mistrust toward research initiatives may have discouraged full participation. Additionally, individuals with lower literacy levels or limited familiarity with digital survey tools may have faced challenges in responding, which could have affected the inclusiveness of the sample.

Data Limitations

A number of respondents skipped specific survey questions, either due to discomfort with sensitive topics, survey fatigue, or uncertainty about particular issues. This resulted in missing values for certain variables, limiting the robustness of some statistical comparisons and cross-tabulations. Although these missing responses were addressed during data cleaning and analysis, they nonetheless reduce the completeness of certain quantitative findings.

In the qualitative components of the study, including key informant interviews and roundtable discussions, the questions were designed to be focused and issue-specific to guide structured analysis. However, participants frequently extended their responses to discuss broader political, social, and historical contexts. While these expansive narratives provided rich and valuable insights into the lived experiences of minority communities, they also introduced challenges in terms of comparability and thematic consistency across interviews and discussions. Not all perspectives could be systematically coded or quantified, and some insights remain illustrative rather than generalizable.

Overall, these methodological, representational, and data-related limitations do not diminish the significance of the study’s findings. Rather, they highlight the complexity of researching politically sensitive issues among marginalized communities and underscore the need for cautious interpretation of the results, particularly when generalizing beyond the study sample.