guidelines for writing the research report

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 11: Presenting Your Research

Writing a Research Report in American Psychological Association (APA) Style

Learning Objectives

• Identify the major sections of an APA-style research report and the basic contents of each section.
• Plan and write an effective APA-style research report.

In this section, we look at how to write an APA-style empirical research report , an article that presents the results of one or more new studies. Recall that the standard sections of an empirical research report provide a kind of outline. Here we consider each of these sections in detail, including what information it contains, how that information is formatted and organized, and tips for writing each section. At the end of this section is a sample APA-style research report that illustrates many of these principles.

Sections of a Research Report

Title page and abstract.

An APA-style research report begins with a  title page . The title is centred in the upper half of the page, with each important word capitalized. The title should clearly and concisely (in about 12 words or fewer) communicate the primary variables and research questions. This sometimes requires a main title followed by a subtitle that elaborates on the main title, in which case the main title and subtitle are separated by a colon. Here are some titles from recent issues of professional journals published by the American Psychological Association.

• Sex Differences in Coping Styles and Implications for Depressed Mood
• Effects of Aging and Divided Attention on Memory for Items and Their Contexts
• Computer-Assisted Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Child Anxiety: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial
• Virtual Driving and Risk Taking: Do Racing Games Increase Risk-Taking Cognitions, Affect, and Behaviour?

Below the title are the authors’ names and, on the next line, their institutional affiliation—the university or other institution where the authors worked when they conducted the research. As we have already seen, the authors are listed in an order that reflects their contribution to the research. When multiple authors have made equal contributions to the research, they often list their names alphabetically or in a randomly determined order.

In some areas of psychology, the titles of many empirical research reports are informal in a way that is perhaps best described as “cute.” They usually take the form of a play on words or a well-known expression that relates to the topic under study. Here are some examples from recent issues of the Journal Psychological Science .

• “Smells Like Clean Spirit: Nonconscious Effects of Scent on Cognition and Behavior”
• “Time Crawls: The Temporal Resolution of Infants’ Visual Attention”
• “Scent of a Woman: Men’s Testosterone Responses to Olfactory Ovulation Cues”
• “Apocalypse Soon?: Dire Messages Reduce Belief in Global Warming by Contradicting Just-World Beliefs”
• “Serial vs. Parallel Processing: Sometimes They Look Like Tweedledum and Tweedledee but They Can (and Should) Be Distinguished”
• “How Do I Love Thee? Let Me Count the Words: The Social Effects of Expressive Writing”

Individual researchers differ quite a bit in their preference for such titles. Some use them regularly, while others never use them. What might be some of the pros and cons of using cute article titles?

For articles that are being submitted for publication, the title page also includes an author note that lists the authors’ full institutional affiliations, any acknowledgments the authors wish to make to agencies that funded the research or to colleagues who commented on it, and contact information for the authors. For student papers that are not being submitted for publication—including theses—author notes are generally not necessary.

The  abstract  is a summary of the study. It is the second page of the manuscript and is headed with the word  Abstract . The first line is not indented. The abstract presents the research question, a summary of the method, the basic results, and the most important conclusions. Because the abstract is usually limited to about 200 words, it can be a challenge to write a good one.

Introduction

The  introduction  begins on the third page of the manuscript. The heading at the top of this page is the full title of the manuscript, with each important word capitalized as on the title page. The introduction includes three distinct subsections, although these are typically not identified by separate headings. The opening introduces the research question and explains why it is interesting, the literature review discusses relevant previous research, and the closing restates the research question and comments on the method used to answer it.

The Opening

The  opening , which is usually a paragraph or two in length, introduces the research question and explains why it is interesting. To capture the reader’s attention, researcher Daryl Bem recommends starting with general observations about the topic under study, expressed in ordinary language (not technical jargon)—observations that are about people and their behaviour (not about researchers or their research; Bem, 2003 [1] ). Concrete examples are often very useful here. According to Bem, this would be a poor way to begin a research report:

Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance received a great deal of attention during the latter part of the 20th century (p. 191)

The following would be much better:

The individual who holds two beliefs that are inconsistent with one another may feel uncomfortable. For example, the person who knows that he or she enjoys smoking but believes it to be unhealthy may experience discomfort arising from the inconsistency or disharmony between these two thoughts or cognitions. This feeling of discomfort was called cognitive dissonance by social psychologist Leon Festinger (1957), who suggested that individuals will be motivated to remove this dissonance in whatever way they can (p. 191).

After capturing the reader’s attention, the opening should go on to introduce the research question and explain why it is interesting. Will the answer fill a gap in the literature? Will it provide a test of an important theory? Does it have practical implications? Giving readers a clear sense of what the research is about and why they should care about it will motivate them to continue reading the literature review—and will help them make sense of it.

Breaking the Rules

Researcher Larry Jacoby reported several studies showing that a word that people see or hear repeatedly can seem more familiar even when they do not recall the repetitions—and that this tendency is especially pronounced among older adults. He opened his article with the following humourous anecdote:

A friend whose mother is suffering symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) tells the story of taking her mother to visit a nursing home, preliminary to her mother’s moving there. During an orientation meeting at the nursing home, the rules and regulations were explained, one of which regarded the dining room. The dining room was described as similar to a fine restaurant except that tipping was not required. The absence of tipping was a central theme in the orientation lecture, mentioned frequently to emphasize the quality of care along with the advantages of having paid in advance. At the end of the meeting, the friend’s mother was asked whether she had any questions. She replied that she only had one question: “Should I tip?” (Jacoby, 1999, p. 3)

Although both humour and personal anecdotes are generally discouraged in APA-style writing, this example is a highly effective way to start because it both engages the reader and provides an excellent real-world example of the topic under study.

The Literature Review

Immediately after the opening comes the  literature review , which describes relevant previous research on the topic and can be anywhere from several paragraphs to several pages in length. However, the literature review is not simply a list of past studies. Instead, it constitutes a kind of argument for why the research question is worth addressing. By the end of the literature review, readers should be convinced that the research question makes sense and that the present study is a logical next step in the ongoing research process.

Like any effective argument, the literature review must have some kind of structure. For example, it might begin by describing a phenomenon in a general way along with several studies that demonstrate it, then describing two or more competing theories of the phenomenon, and finally presenting a hypothesis to test one or more of the theories. Or it might describe one phenomenon, then describe another phenomenon that seems inconsistent with the first one, then propose a theory that resolves the inconsistency, and finally present a hypothesis to test that theory. In applied research, it might describe a phenomenon or theory, then describe how that phenomenon or theory applies to some important real-world situation, and finally suggest a way to test whether it does, in fact, apply to that situation.

Looking at the literature review in this way emphasizes a few things. First, it is extremely important to start with an outline of the main points that you want to make, organized in the order that you want to make them. The basic structure of your argument, then, should be apparent from the outline itself. Second, it is important to emphasize the structure of your argument in your writing. One way to do this is to begin the literature review by summarizing your argument even before you begin to make it. “In this article, I will describe two apparently contradictory phenomena, present a new theory that has the potential to resolve the apparent contradiction, and finally present a novel hypothesis to test the theory.” Another way is to open each paragraph with a sentence that summarizes the main point of the paragraph and links it to the preceding points. These opening sentences provide the “transitions” that many beginning researchers have difficulty with. Instead of beginning a paragraph by launching into a description of a previous study, such as “Williams (2004) found that…,” it is better to start by indicating something about why you are describing this particular study. Here are some simple examples:

Another example of this phenomenon comes from the work of Williams (2004).

Williams (2004) offers one explanation of this phenomenon.

An alternative perspective has been provided by Williams (2004).

We used a method based on the one used by Williams (2004).

Finally, remember that your goal is to construct an argument for why your research question is interesting and worth addressing—not necessarily why your favourite answer to it is correct. In other words, your literature review must be balanced. If you want to emphasize the generality of a phenomenon, then of course you should discuss various studies that have demonstrated it. However, if there are other studies that have failed to demonstrate it, you should discuss them too. Or if you are proposing a new theory, then of course you should discuss findings that are consistent with that theory. However, if there are other findings that are inconsistent with it, again, you should discuss them too. It is acceptable to argue that the  balance  of the research supports the existence of a phenomenon or is consistent with a theory (and that is usually the best that researchers in psychology can hope for), but it is not acceptable to  ignore contradictory evidence. Besides, a large part of what makes a research question interesting is uncertainty about its answer.

The Closing

The  closing  of the introduction—typically the final paragraph or two—usually includes two important elements. The first is a clear statement of the main research question or hypothesis. This statement tends to be more formal and precise than in the opening and is often expressed in terms of operational definitions of the key variables. The second is a brief overview of the method and some comment on its appropriateness. Here, for example, is how Darley and Latané (1968) [2] concluded the introduction to their classic article on the bystander effect:

These considerations lead to the hypothesis that the more bystanders to an emergency, the less likely, or the more slowly, any one bystander will intervene to provide aid. To test this proposition it would be necessary to create a situation in which a realistic “emergency” could plausibly occur. Each subject should also be blocked from communicating with others to prevent his getting information about their behaviour during the emergency. Finally, the experimental situation should allow for the assessment of the speed and frequency of the subjects’ reaction to the emergency. The experiment reported below attempted to fulfill these conditions. (p. 378)

Thus the introduction leads smoothly into the next major section of the article—the method section.

The  method section  is where you describe how you conducted your study. An important principle for writing a method section is that it should be clear and detailed enough that other researchers could replicate the study by following your “recipe.” This means that it must describe all the important elements of the study—basic demographic characteristics of the participants, how they were recruited, whether they were randomly assigned, how the variables were manipulated or measured, how counterbalancing was accomplished, and so on. At the same time, it should avoid irrelevant details such as the fact that the study was conducted in Classroom 37B of the Industrial Technology Building or that the questionnaire was double-sided and completed using pencils.

The method section begins immediately after the introduction ends with the heading “Method” (not “Methods”) centred on the page. Immediately after this is the subheading “Participants,” left justified and in italics. The participants subsection indicates how many participants there were, the number of women and men, some indication of their age, other demographics that may be relevant to the study, and how they were recruited, including any incentives given for participation.

After the participants section, the structure can vary a bit. Figure 11.1 shows three common approaches. In the first, the participants section is followed by a design and procedure subsection, which describes the rest of the method. This works well for methods that are relatively simple and can be described adequately in a few paragraphs. In the second approach, the participants section is followed by separate design and procedure subsections. This works well when both the design and the procedure are relatively complicated and each requires multiple paragraphs.

What is the difference between design and procedure? The design of a study is its overall structure. What were the independent and dependent variables? Was the independent variable manipulated, and if so, was it manipulated between or within subjects? How were the variables operationally defined? The procedure is how the study was carried out. It often works well to describe the procedure in terms of what the participants did rather than what the researchers did. For example, the participants gave their informed consent, read a set of instructions, completed a block of four practice trials, completed a block of 20 test trials, completed two questionnaires, and were debriefed and excused.

In the third basic way to organize a method section, the participants subsection is followed by a materials subsection before the design and procedure subsections. This works well when there are complicated materials to describe. This might mean multiple questionnaires, written vignettes that participants read and respond to, perceptual stimuli, and so on. The heading of this subsection can be modified to reflect its content. Instead of “Materials,” it can be “Questionnaires,” “Stimuli,” and so on.

The  results section  is where you present the main results of the study, including the results of the statistical analyses. Although it does not include the raw data—individual participants’ responses or scores—researchers should save their raw data and make them available to other researchers who request them. Several journals now encourage the open sharing of raw data online.

Although there are no standard subsections, it is still important for the results section to be logically organized. Typically it begins with certain preliminary issues. One is whether any participants or responses were excluded from the analyses and why. The rationale for excluding data should be described clearly so that other researchers can decide whether it is appropriate. A second preliminary issue is how multiple responses were combined to produce the primary variables in the analyses. For example, if participants rated the attractiveness of 20 stimulus people, you might have to explain that you began by computing the mean attractiveness rating for each participant. Or if they recalled as many items as they could from study list of 20 words, did you count the number correctly recalled, compute the percentage correctly recalled, or perhaps compute the number correct minus the number incorrect? A third preliminary issue is the reliability of the measures. This is where you would present test-retest correlations, Cronbach’s α, or other statistics to show that the measures are consistent across time and across items. A final preliminary issue is whether the manipulation was successful. This is where you would report the results of any manipulation checks.

The results section should then tackle the primary research questions, one at a time. Again, there should be a clear organization. One approach would be to answer the most general questions and then proceed to answer more specific ones. Another would be to answer the main question first and then to answer secondary ones. Regardless, Bem (2003) [3] suggests the following basic structure for discussing each new result:

• Remind the reader of the research question.
• Give the answer to the research question in words.
• Present the relevant statistics.
• Qualify the answer if necessary.
• Summarize the result.

Notice that only Step 3 necessarily involves numbers. The rest of the steps involve presenting the research question and the answer to it in words. In fact, the basic results should be clear even to a reader who skips over the numbers.

The  discussion  is the last major section of the research report. Discussions usually consist of some combination of the following elements:

• Summary of the research
• Theoretical implications
• Practical implications
• Limitations
• Suggestions for future research

The discussion typically begins with a summary of the study that provides a clear answer to the research question. In a short report with a single study, this might require no more than a sentence. In a longer report with multiple studies, it might require a paragraph or even two. The summary is often followed by a discussion of the theoretical implications of the research. Do the results provide support for any existing theories? If not, how  can  they be explained? Although you do not have to provide a definitive explanation or detailed theory for your results, you at least need to outline one or more possible explanations. In applied research—and often in basic research—there is also some discussion of the practical implications of the research. How can the results be used, and by whom, to accomplish some real-world goal?

The theoretical and practical implications are often followed by a discussion of the study’s limitations. Perhaps there are problems with its internal or external validity. Perhaps the manipulation was not very effective or the measures not very reliable. Perhaps there is some evidence that participants did not fully understand their task or that they were suspicious of the intent of the researchers. Now is the time to discuss these issues and how they might have affected the results. But do not overdo it. All studies have limitations, and most readers will understand that a different sample or different measures might have produced different results. Unless there is good reason to think they  would have, however, there is no reason to mention these routine issues. Instead, pick two or three limitations that seem like they could have influenced the results, explain how they could have influenced the results, and suggest ways to deal with them.

Most discussions end with some suggestions for future research. If the study did not satisfactorily answer the original research question, what will it take to do so? What  new  research questions has the study raised? This part of the discussion, however, is not just a list of new questions. It is a discussion of two or three of the most important unresolved issues. This means identifying and clarifying each question, suggesting some alternative answers, and even suggesting ways they could be studied.

Finally, some researchers are quite good at ending their articles with a sweeping or thought-provoking conclusion. Darley and Latané (1968) [4] , for example, ended their article on the bystander effect by discussing the idea that whether people help others may depend more on the situation than on their personalities. Their final sentence is, “If people understand the situational forces that can make them hesitate to intervene, they may better overcome them” (p. 383). However, this kind of ending can be difficult to pull off. It can sound overreaching or just banal and end up detracting from the overall impact of the article. It is often better simply to end when you have made your final point (although you should avoid ending on a limitation).

The references section begins on a new page with the heading “References” centred at the top of the page. All references cited in the text are then listed in the format presented earlier. They are listed alphabetically by the last name of the first author. If two sources have the same first author, they are listed alphabetically by the last name of the second author. If all the authors are the same, then they are listed chronologically by the year of publication. Everything in the reference list is double-spaced both within and between references.

Appendices, Tables, and Figures

Appendices, tables, and figures come after the references. An  appendix  is appropriate for supplemental material that would interrupt the flow of the research report if it were presented within any of the major sections. An appendix could be used to present lists of stimulus words, questionnaire items, detailed descriptions of special equipment or unusual statistical analyses, or references to the studies that are included in a meta-analysis. Each appendix begins on a new page. If there is only one, the heading is “Appendix,” centred at the top of the page. If there is more than one, the headings are “Appendix A,” “Appendix B,” and so on, and they appear in the order they were first mentioned in the text of the report.

After any appendices come tables and then figures. Tables and figures are both used to present results. Figures can also be used to illustrate theories (e.g., in the form of a flowchart), display stimuli, outline procedures, and present many other kinds of information. Each table and figure appears on its own page. Tables are numbered in the order that they are first mentioned in the text (“Table 1,” “Table 2,” and so on). Figures are numbered the same way (“Figure 1,” “Figure 2,” and so on). A brief explanatory title, with the important words capitalized, appears above each table. Each figure is given a brief explanatory caption, where (aside from proper nouns or names) only the first word of each sentence is capitalized. More details on preparing APA-style tables and figures are presented later in the book.

Sample APA-Style Research Report

Figures 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, and 11.5 show some sample pages from an APA-style empirical research report originally written by undergraduate student Tomoe Suyama at California State University, Fresno. The main purpose of these figures is to illustrate the basic organization and formatting of an APA-style empirical research report, although many high-level and low-level style conventions can be seen here too.

Key Takeaways

• An APA-style empirical research report consists of several standard sections. The main ones are the abstract, introduction, method, results, discussion, and references.
• The introduction consists of an opening that presents the research question, a literature review that describes previous research on the topic, and a closing that restates the research question and comments on the method. The literature review constitutes an argument for why the current study is worth doing.
• The method section describes the method in enough detail that another researcher could replicate the study. At a minimum, it consists of a participants subsection and a design and procedure subsection.
• The results section describes the results in an organized fashion. Each primary result is presented in terms of statistical results but also explained in words.
• The discussion typically summarizes the study, discusses theoretical and practical implications and limitations of the study, and offers suggestions for further research.
• Practice: Look through an issue of a general interest professional journal (e.g.,  Psychological Science ). Read the opening of the first five articles and rate the effectiveness of each one from 1 ( very ineffective ) to 5 ( very effective ). Write a sentence or two explaining each rating.
• Practice: Find a recent article in a professional journal and identify where the opening, literature review, and closing of the introduction begin and end.
• Practice: Find a recent article in a professional journal and highlight in a different colour each of the following elements in the discussion: summary, theoretical implications, practical implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research.

Long Descriptions

Figure 11.1 long description: Table showing three ways of organizing an APA-style method section.

In the simple method, there are two subheadings: “Participants” (which might begin “The participants were…”) and “Design and procedure” (which might begin “There were three conditions…”).

In the typical method, there are three subheadings: “Participants” (“The participants were…”), “Design” (“There were three conditions…”), and “Procedure” (“Participants viewed each stimulus on the computer screen…”).

In the complex method, there are four subheadings: “Participants” (“The participants were…”), “Materials” (“The stimuli were…”), “Design” (“There were three conditions…”), and “Procedure” (“Participants viewed each stimulus on the computer screen…”). [Return to Figure 11.1]

• Bem, D. J. (2003). Writing the empirical journal article. In J. M. Darley, M. P. Zanna, & H. R. Roediger III (Eds.),  The compleat academic: A practical guide for the beginning social scientist  (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. ↵
• Darley, J. M., & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4 , 377–383. ↵

A type of research article which describes one or more new empirical studies conducted by the authors.

The page at the beginning of an APA-style research report containing the title of the article, the authors’ names, and their institutional affiliation.

A summary of a research study.

The third page of a manuscript containing the research question, the literature review, and comments about how to answer the research question.

An introduction to the research question and explanation for why this question is interesting.

A description of relevant previous research on the topic being discusses and an argument for why the research is worth addressing.

The end of the introduction, where the research question is reiterated and the method is commented upon.

The section of a research report where the method used to conduct the study is described.

The main results of the study, including the results from statistical analyses, are presented in a research article.

Section of a research report that summarizes the study's results and interprets them by referring back to the study's theoretical background.

Part of a research report which contains supplemental material.

Research Methods in Psychology - 2nd Canadian Edition Copyright © 2015 by Paul C. Price, Rajiv Jhangiani, & I-Chant A. Chiang is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Research Report: Definition, Types + [Writing Guide]

One of the reasons for carrying out research is to add to the existing body of knowledge. Therefore, when conducting research, you need to document your processes and findings in a research report. 

With a research report, it is easy to outline the findings of your systematic investigation and any gaps needing further inquiry. Knowing how to create a detailed research report will prove useful when you need to conduct research.  

What is a Research Report?

A research report is a well-crafted document that outlines the processes, data, and findings of a systematic investigation. It is an important document that serves as a first-hand account of the research process, and it is typically considered an objective and accurate source of information.

In many ways, a research report can be considered as a summary of the research process that clearly highlights findings, recommendations, and other important details. Reading a well-written research report should provide you with all the information you need about the core areas of the research process.

Features of a Research Report 

So how do you recognize a research report when you see one? Here are some of the basic features that define a research report. 

• It is a detailed presentation of research processes and findings, and it usually includes tables and graphs. 
• It is written in a formal language.
• A research report is usually written in the third person.
• It is informative and based on first-hand verifiable information.
• It is formally structured with headings, sections, and bullet points.
• It always includes recommendations for future actions. 

Types of Research Report 

The research report is classified based on two things; nature of research and target audience.

Nature of Research

• Qualitative Research Report

This is the type of report written for qualitative research . It outlines the methods, processes, and findings of a qualitative method of systematic investigation. In educational research, a qualitative research report provides an opportunity for one to apply his or her knowledge and develop skills in planning and executing qualitative research projects.

A qualitative research report is usually descriptive in nature. Hence, in addition to presenting details of the research process, you must also create a descriptive narrative of the information.

• Quantitative Research Report

A quantitative research report is a type of research report that is written for quantitative research. Quantitative research is a type of systematic investigation that pays attention to numerical or statistical values in a bid to find answers to research questions. 

In this type of research report, the researcher presents quantitative data to support the research process and findings. Unlike a qualitative research report that is mainly descriptive, a quantitative research report works with numbers; that is, it is numerical in nature. 

Target Audience

Also, a research report can be said to be technical or popular based on the target audience. If you’re dealing with a general audience, you would need to present a popular research report, and if you’re dealing with a specialized audience, you would submit a technical report. 

• Technical Research Report

A technical research report is a detailed document that you present after carrying out industry-based research. This report is highly specialized because it provides information for a technical audience; that is, individuals with above-average knowledge in the field of study. 

In a technical research report, the researcher is expected to provide specific information about the research process, including statistical analyses and sampling methods. Also, the use of language is highly specialized and filled with jargon. 

Examples of technical research reports include legal and medical research reports. 

• Popular Research Report

A popular research report is one for a general audience; that is, for individuals who do not necessarily have any knowledge in the field of study. A popular research report aims to make information accessible to everyone. 

It is written in very simple language, which makes it easy to understand the findings and recommendations. Examples of popular research reports are the information contained in newspapers and magazines. 

Importance of a Research Report 

• Knowledge Transfer: As already stated above, one of the reasons for carrying out research is to contribute to the existing body of knowledge, and this is made possible with a research report. A research report serves as a means to effectively communicate the findings of a systematic investigation to all and sundry.  
• Identification of Knowledge Gaps: With a research report, you’d be able to identify knowledge gaps for further inquiry. A research report shows what has been done while hinting at other areas needing systematic investigation. 
• In market research, a research report would help you understand the market needs and peculiarities at a glance. 
• A research report allows you to present information in a precise and concise manner. 
• It is time-efficient and practical because, in a research report, you do not have to spend time detailing the findings of your research work in person. You can easily send out the report via email and have stakeholders look at it. 

Guide to Writing a Research Report

A lot of detail goes into writing a research report, and getting familiar with the different requirements would help you create the ideal research report. A research report is usually broken down into multiple sections, which allows for a concise presentation of information.

Structure and Example of a Research Report

This is the title of your systematic investigation. Your title should be concise and point to the aims, objectives, and findings of a research report. 

• Table of Contents

This is like a compass that makes it easier for readers to navigate the research report.

An abstract is an overview that highlights all important aspects of the research including the research method, data collection process, and research findings. Think of an abstract as a summary of your research report that presents pertinent information in a concise manner. 

An abstract is always brief; typically 100-150 words and goes straight to the point. The focus of your research abstract should be the 5Ws and 1H format – What, Where, Why, When, Who and How. 

• Introduction

Here, the researcher highlights the aims and objectives of the systematic investigation as well as the problem which the systematic investigation sets out to solve. When writing the report introduction, it is also essential to indicate whether the purposes of the research were achieved or would require more work.

In the introduction section, the researcher specifies the research problem and also outlines the significance of the systematic investigation. Also, the researcher is expected to outline any jargons and terminologies that are contained in the research.  

• Literature Review

A literature review is a written survey of existing knowledge in the field of study. In other words, it is the section where you provide an overview and analysis of different research works that are relevant to your systematic investigation. 

It highlights existing research knowledge and areas needing further investigation, which your research has sought to fill. At this stage, you can also hint at your research hypothesis and its possible implications for the existing body of knowledge in your field of study. 

• An Account of Investigation

This is a detailed account of the research process, including the methodology, sample, and research subjects. Here, you are expected to provide in-depth information on the research process including the data collection and analysis procedures. 

In a quantitative research report, you’d need to provide information surveys, questionnaires and other quantitative data collection methods used in your research. In a qualitative research report, you are expected to describe the qualitative data collection methods used in your research including interviews and focus groups. 

In this section, you are expected to present the results of the systematic investigation. 

This section further explains the findings of the research, earlier outlined. Here, you are expected to present a justification for each outcome and show whether the results are in line with your hypotheses or if other research studies have come up with similar results.

• Conclusions

This is a summary of all the information in the report. It also outlines the significance of the entire study. 

• References and Appendices

This section contains a list of all the primary and secondary research sources. 

Tips for Writing a Research Report

• Define the Context for the Report

As is obtainable when writing an essay, defining the context for your research report would help you create a detailed yet concise document. This is why you need to create an outline before writing so that you do not miss out on anything. 

• Define your Audience

Writing with your audience in mind is essential as it determines the tone of the report. If you’re writing for a general audience, you would want to present the information in a simple and relatable manner. For a specialized audience, you would need to make use of technical and field-specific terms. 

• Include Significant Findings

The idea of a research report is to present some sort of abridged version of your systematic investigation. In your report, you should exclude irrelevant information while highlighting only important data and findings. 

• Include Illustrations

Your research report should include illustrations and other visual representations of your data. Graphs, pie charts, and relevant images lend additional credibility to your systematic investigation.

• Choose the Right Title

A good research report title is brief, precise, and contains keywords from your research. It should provide a clear idea of your systematic investigation so that readers can grasp the entire focus of your research from the title. 

• Proofread the Report

Before publishing the document, ensure that you give it a second look to authenticate the information. If you can, get someone else to go through the report, too, and you can also run it through proofreading and editing software. 

How to Gather Research Data for Your Report  

• Understand the Problem

Every research aims at solving a specific problem or set of problems, and this should be at the back of your mind when writing your research report. Understanding the problem would help you to filter the information you have and include only important data in your report. 

• Know what your report seeks to achieve

This is somewhat similar to the point above because, in some way, the aim of your research report is intertwined with the objectives of your systematic investigation. Identifying the primary purpose of writing a research report would help you to identify and present the required information accordingly. 

• Identify your audience

Knowing your target audience plays a crucial role in data collection for a research report. If your research report is specifically for an organization, you would want to present industry-specific information or show how the research findings are relevant to the work that the company does. 

• Create Surveys/Questionnaires

A survey is a research method that is used to gather data from a specific group of people through a set of questions. It can be either quantitative or qualitative. 

A survey is usually made up of structured questions, and it can be administered online or offline. However, an online survey is a more effective method of research data collection because it helps you save time and gather data with ease. 

You can seamlessly create an online questionnaire for your research on Formplus . With the multiple sharing options available in the builder, you would be able to administer your survey to respondents in little or no time. 

Formplus also has a report summary too l that you can use to create custom visual reports for your research.

Step-by-step guide on how to create an online questionnaire using Formplus  

• Sign into Formplus

In the Formplus builder, you can easily create different online questionnaires for your research by dragging and dropping preferred fields into your form. To access the Formplus builder, you will need to create an account on Formplus. 

Once you do this, sign in to your account and click on Create new form to begin. 

• Edit Form Title : Click on the field provided to input your form title, for example, “Research Questionnaire.”
• Edit Form : Click on the edit icon to edit the form.
• Add Fields : Drag and drop preferred form fields into your form in the Formplus builder inputs column. There are several field input options for questionnaires in the Formplus builder. 
• Edit fields
• Click on “Save”
• Form Customization: With the form customization options in the form builder, you can easily change the outlook of your form and make it more unique and personalized. Formplus allows you to change your form theme, add background images, and even change the font according to your needs. 
• Multiple Sharing Options: Formplus offers various form-sharing options, which enables you to share your questionnaire with respondents easily. You can use the direct social media sharing buttons to share your form link to your organization’s social media pages.  You can also send out your survey form as email invitations to your research subjects too. If you wish, you can share your form’s QR code or embed it on your organization’s website for easy access. 

Conclusion  

Always remember that a research report is just as important as the actual systematic investigation because it plays a vital role in communicating research findings to everyone else. This is why you must take care to create a concise document summarizing the process of conducting any research. 

In this article, we’ve outlined essential tips to help you create a research report. When writing your report, you should always have the audience at the back of your mind, as this would set the tone for the document. 

Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!

• ethnographic research survey
• research report
• research report survey
• busayo.longe

You may also like:

How to Write a Problem Statement for your Research

Learn how to write problem statements before commencing any research effort. Learn about its structure and explore examples

Assessment Tools: Types, Examples & Importance

In this article, you’ll learn about different assessment tools to help you evaluate performance in various contexts

Ethnographic Research: Types, Methods + [Question Examples]

Simple guide on ethnographic research, it types, methods, examples and advantages. Also highlights how to conduct an ethnographic...

21 Chrome Extensions for Academic Researchers in 2022

In this article, we will discuss a number of chrome extensions you can use to make your research process even seamless

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.10(1); 2014 Jan

Ten Simple Rules for Writing Research Papers

Weixiong zhang.

Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Department of Genetics, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America

The importance of writing well can never be overstated for a successful professional career, and the ability to write solid papers is an essential trait of a productive researcher. Writing and publishing a paper has its own life cycle; properly following a course of action and avoiding missteps can be vital to the overall success not only of a paper but of the underlying research as well. Here, we offer ten simple rules for writing and publishing research papers.

As a caveat, this essay is not about the mechanics of composing a paper, much of which has been covered elsewhere, e.g., [1] , [2] . Rather, it is about the principles and attitude that can help guide the process of writing in particular and research in general. In this regard, some of the discussion will complement, extend, and refine some advice given in early articles of this Ten Simple Rules series of PLOS Computational Biology [3] – [8] .

Rule 1: Make It a Driving Force

Never separate writing a paper from the underlying research. After all, writing and research are integral parts of the overall enterprise. Therefore, design a project with an ultimate paper firmly in mind. Include an outline of the paper in the initial project design documents to help form the research objectives, determine the logical flow of the experiments, and organize the materials and data to be used. Furthermore, use writing as a tool to reassess the overall project, reevaluate the logic of the experiments, and examine the validity of the results during the research. As a result, the overall research may need to be adjusted, the project design may be revised, new methods may be devised, and new data may be collected. The process of research and writing may be repeated if necessary.

Rule 2: Less Is More

It is often the case that more than one hypothesis or objective may be tackled in one project. It is also not uncommon that the data and results gathered for one objective can serve additional purposes. A decision on having one or more papers needs to be made, and the decision will be affected by various factors. Regardless of the validity of these factors, the overriding consideration must be the potential impact that the paper may have on the research subject and field. Therefore, the significance, completeness, and coherence of the results presented as a whole should be the principal guide for selecting the story to tell, the hypothesis to focus upon, and materials to include in the paper, as well as the yardstick for measuring the quality of the paper. By this metric, less is more , i.e., fewer but more significant papers serve both the research community and one's career better than more papers of less significance.

Rule 3: Pick the Right Audience

Deciding on an angle of the story to focus upon is the next hurdle to jump at the initial stage of the writing. The results from a computational study of a biological problem can often be presented to biologists, computational scientists, or both; deciding what story to tell and from what angle to pitch the main idea is important. This issue translates to choosing a target audience, as well as an appropriate journal, to cast the main messages to. This is critical for determining the organization of the paper and the level of detail of the story, so as to write the paper with the audience in mind. Indeed, writing a paper for biologists in general is different from writing for specialists in computational biology.

Rule 4: Be Logical

The foundation of “lively” writing for smooth reading is a sound and clear logic underlying the story of the paper. Although experiments may be carried out independently, the result from one experiment may form premises and/or provide supporting data for the next experiment. The experiments and results, therefore, must be presented in a logical order. In order to make the writing an easy process to follow, this logical flow should be determined before any other writing strategy or tactic is exercised. This logical order can also help you avoid discussing the same issue or presenting the same argument in multiple places in the paper, which may dilute the readers' attention.

An effective tactic to help develop a sound logical flow is to imaginatively create a set of figures and tables, which will ultimately be developed from experimental results, and order them in a logical way based on the information flow through the experiments. In other words, the figures and tables alone can tell the story without consulting additional material. If all or some of these figures and tables are included in the final manuscript, make every effort to make them self-contained (see Rule 5 below), a favorable feature for the paper to have. In addition, these figures and tables, as well as the threading logical flow, may be used to direct or organize research activities, reinforcing Rule 1.

Rule 5: Be Thorough and Make It Complete

Completeness is a cornerstone for a research paper, following Rule 2. This cornerstone needs to be set in both content and presentation. First, important and relevant aspects of a hypothesis pursued in the research should be discussed with detailed supporting data. If the page limit is an issue, focus on one or two main aspects with sufficient details in the main text and leave the rest to online supporting materials. As a reminder, be sure to keep the details of all experiments (e.g., parameters of the experiments and versions of software) for revision, post-publication correspondence, or importantly, reproducibility of the results. Second, don't simply state what results are presented in figures and tables, which makes the writing repetitive because they are self-contained (see below), but rather, interpret them with insights to the underlying story to be told (typically in the results section) and discuss their implication (typically in the discussion section).

Third, make the whole paper self-contained. Introduce an adequate amount of background and introductory material for the right audience (following Rule 3). A statistical test, e.g., hypergeometric tests for enrichment of a subset of objects, may be obvious to statisticians or computational biologists but may be foreign to others, so providing a sufficient amount of background is the key for delivery of the material. When an uncommon term is used, give a definition besides a reference to it. Fourth, try to avoid “making your readers do the arithmetic” [9] , i.e., be clear enough so that the readers don't have to make any inference from the presented data. If such results need to be discussed, make them explicit even though they may be readily derived from other data. Fifth, figures and tables are essential components of a paper, each of which must be included for a good reason; make each of them self-contained with all required information clearly specified in the legend to guide interpretation of the data presented.

Rule 6: Be Concise

This is a caveat to Rule 5 and is singled out to emphasize its importance. Being thorough is not a license to writing that is unnecessarily descriptive, repetitive, or lengthy. Rather, on the contrary, “simplicity is the ultimate sophistication” [10] . Overly elaborate writing is distracting and boring and places a burden on the readers. In contrast, the delivery of a message is more rigorous if the writing is precise and concise. One excellent example is Watson and Crick's Nobel-Prize-winning paper on the DNA double helix structure [11] —it is only two pages long!

Rule 7: Be Artistic

A complete draft of a paper requires a lot of work, so it pays to go the extra mile to polish it to facilitate enjoyable reading. A paper presented as a piece of art will give referees a positive initial impression of your passion toward the research and the quality of the work, which will work in your favor in the reviewing process. Therefore, concentrate on spelling, grammar, usage, and a “lively” writing style that avoids successions of simple, boring, declarative sentences. Have an authoritative dictionary with a thesaurus and a style manual, e.g., [1] , handy and use them relentlessly. Also pay attention to small details in presentation, such as paragraph indentation, page margins, and fonts. If you are not a native speaker of the language the paper is written in, make sure to have a native speaker go over the final draft to ensure correctness and accuracy of the language used.

Rule 8: Be Your Own Judge

A complete manuscript typically requires many rounds of revision. Taking a correct attitude during revision is critical to the resolution of most problems in the writing. Be objective and honest about your work and do not exaggerate or belittle the significance of the results and the elegance of the methods developed. After working long and hard, you are an expert on the problem you studied, and you are the best referee of your own work, after all . Therefore, inspect the research and the paper in the context of the state of the art.

When revising a draft, purge yourself out of the picture and leave your passion for your work aside. To be concrete, put yourself completely in the shoes of a referee and scrutinize all the pieces—the significance of the work, the logic of the story, the correctness of the results and conclusions, the organization of the paper, and the presentation of the materials. In practice, you may put a draft aside for a day or two—try to forget about it completely—and then come back to it fresh, consider it as if it were someone else's writing, and read it through while trying to poke holes in the story and writing. In this process, extract the meaning literally from the language as written and do not try to use your own view to interpret or extrapolate from what was written. Don't be afraid to throw away pieces of your writing and start over from scratch if they do not pass this “not-yourself” test. This can be painful, but the final manuscript will be more logically sound and better organized.

Rule 9: Test the Water in Your Own Backyard

It is wise to anticipate the possible questions and critiques the referees may raise and preemptively address their concerns before submission. To do so, collect feedback and critiques from others, e.g., colleagues and collaborators. Discuss your work with them and get their opinions, suggestions, and comments. A talk at a lab meeting or a departmental seminar will also help rectify potential issues that need to be addressed. If you are a graduate student, running the paper and results through the thesis committee may be effective to iron out possible problems.

Rule 10: Build a Virtual Team of Collaborators

When a submission is rejected or poorly reviewed, don't be offended and don't take it personally. Be aware that the referees spent their time on the paper, which they might have otherwise devoted to their own research, so they are doing you a favor and helping you shape the paper to be more accessible to the targeted audience. Therefore, consider the referees as your collaborators and treat the reviews with respect. This attitude can improve the quality of your paper and research.

Read and examine the reviews objectively—the principles set in Rule 8 apply here as well. Often a criticism was raised because one of the aspects of a hypothesis was not adequately studied, or an important result from previous research was not mentioned or not consistent with yours. If a critique is about the robustness of a method used or the validity of a result, often the research needs to be redone or more data need to be collected. If you believe the referee has misunderstood a particular point, check the writing. It is often the case that improper wording or presentation misled the referee. If that's the case, revise the writing thoroughly. Don't argue without supporting data. Don't submit the paper elsewhere without additional work. This can only temporally mitigate the issue, you will not be happy with the paper in the long run, and this may hurt your reputation.

Finally, keep in mind that writing is personal, and it takes a lot of practice to find one's style. What works and what does not work vary from person to person. Undoubtedly, dedicated practice will help produce stronger papers with long-lasting impact.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Sharlee Climer, Richard Korf, and Kevin Zhang for critical reading of the manuscript.

Funding Statement

The author received no specific funding for this article.

Research Design in Business and Management pp 53–84 Cite as

Writing up a Research Report

• Stefan Hunziker 3 &
• Michael Blankenagel 3  
• First Online: 04 January 2024

298 Accesses

A research report is one big argument about how and why you came up with your conclusions. To make it a convincing argument, a typical guiding structure has developed. In the different chapters, there are distinct issues that need to be addressed to explain to the reader why your conclusions are valid. The governing principle for writing the report is full disclosure: to explain everything and ensure replicability by another researcher.

Download chapter PDF

When you have finished studying this chapter, you will be able to:

Write up a state-of-the-art research report

Understand how to use scientific language in research reports

Develop a structure for your research report that comprises all relevant sections

Assess the consistency of your research design

Avoid dumbfounding your reader with surprising information

4.1 Introduction to Writing a Research Report

In the previous sections, we stressed the importance of increasing the body of knowledge. This body refers to society, i.e., what we all know about a topic. This requires the dissemination of the research project’s conclusion. To avoid a chasm of believers and non-believers in this conclusion, its validity must be shown by explaining how and why it has been drawn. Therefore, you disclose all the decisions, reasons, and impacts throughout the research process, divulging your research design and its execution.

So, you’ll need to write a research report to add your research to the body of knowledge. A commonly used structure for research reports has emerged to ensure readers find the information about the conclusion and its validity and facilitate the writing process. The standard research report comprises the following seven sections:

Introduction

Theoretical background, literature review.

Conclusion.

This may vary according to your institution’s demand and your research project. So, the structure is more of a guideline, but the issues covered in the sections are universal: substance over form. This does not change with the length of your research paper. An article in a scientific journal has the same basic structure (and issues to address) as a bachelor’s thesis, master's thesis, and doctoral dissertation. In the following, we describe each section's structure and challenges.

4.2 General Remarks on Scientific Writing

Before describing the purpose and content of the various sections of a research report, we address several misconceptions about academic or scientific writing:

No surprises: You don’t write a drama or crime story and don’t need to worry about any suspense-building. Academic texts are not inherently boring, but the interest stems from the research questions and how they are answered. The reader is interested in your conclusion and process of argumentation. Nothing should surprise the reader, but everything should be explained: why you are doing what you are doing, where you are in your report, and what comes next. “No surprises” also hold to your discussion of arguments. Do not explain to the reader that your findings align with the results of researcher Jane or John Doe if this study drops out of the blue. It would be best if you mentioned it in your literature review first.

Repetitions are acceptable: With “no surprises” comes the necessity to reiterate some issues. That is OK. It is better to repeat something than to leave the reader looking for information they expected at this point in the report. Referencing more details to other parts of your paper might help to prevent too tedious repetitions.

Using first-person pronouns is not taboo: Referring to yourself or the author(s) as “I” or “we” is fine. It is often taught that scientific texts should not entail personal opinions (we will address this in the following rule) and appear as objective as possible. The author(s) should refer to themselves as “the author.” This is not inherently wrong. So, you can refer to yourself as “the author.” But this is somewhat outdated for several reasons: First, many decisions must be made within a research project. There is no algorithm you feed with research questions that results in a research report and a conclusion. Writing about these decisions from a first-person perspective shows that these decisions could have been made differently. There are (hopefully) good reasons you did it this way. Still, it has been your decision, and you are accepting the responsibility that goes along with it—second, referring to yourself as the first person makes distinguishing between your opinion and other authors’ opinions much easier and formulations much less cumbersome. This is valid, especially in the literature review and discussion section. Just imagine criticizing another author’s study: “The author of this report thinks that the author of that report is wrong because that author jumped to their conclusion without making this step which this author deems necessary.” This can potentially turn your report into a linguistic nightmare for your readers.

Your own opinion is essential and valued: You are the researcher, and it is your research project. You are conducting a research project and are deciding along the way. It is not only perfectly legit to state your (well-reasoned) opinions but also a necessity and a significant part of your intellectual contribution. The only thing to remember is that it must be abundantly clear what somebody else did, thought, etc., and what you did, found out, thought, decided, etc. The critical reflection of other’s research studies and your findings in the light of what other researchers found out is an essential and integral part of your report. Without it, your intellectual contribution would be critically diminished.

User guidance is essential: This goes together with “no surprises.” Do not force the reader to draw their conclusions and find out what is happening but explain to them what you think you have established so far and what you will do next to achieve what. This leaves the reader with all the information to draw their conclusions but makes it much easier for them to follow your thinking.

Relevance of content: Everything you write must be relevant to your argumentation. So, you do not write everything you know, but you need to curtail it to those parts that impact your arguments and conclusion. For example, suppose the reader reads about a theory in your theoretical background. In that case, they expect you to do something with it: you will elaborate on it or collect evidence that confirms or rejects it. What they do not expect is that this theory is never referred to in your research again. This makes the final revision of your report both important and taxing: nothing should come as a surprise, but everything you state needs to apply to your argumentation. This requires you to check that there are no loose ends or beginnings.

Past tense: Write your report in the past tense, describing what you did and your decisions. This seems obvious at first glance, but during the research project, usually, two issues arise. First, how can you deal with the additions to the body of knowledge? Should they not be in the present tense, as arguments and conclusions are (still) valid now? Writing in English makes writing easier as the simple past denotes ongoing action: you drew this conclusion (and still do). Second, the same question arises about the preliminary study. Often a preliminary study detailing the plan for your research needs to be handed in and approved. As this happens before the actual executions, it is natural to write the preliminary study in the future tense. This would require rewriting everything in the past tense when the research has been conducted. Save the effort and write immediately in the past tense. Your supervisor should be able to infer the time sequence.

With these general remarks in mind, we facilitate the writing process and make the underlying line of thought of the report’s section more obvious. We start with a summary of all sections to get a better overview of the reasoning in your report before providing a more detailed description.

4.3 Overview of the Sections

In this chapter, we present an overview of the section in a research report. It helps to know what part of your argument your research report represents can be found where before detailing how to argue in each section.

Management summary

This section contains a summary of the research. The principal arguments of each chapter are condensed into a standalone one-pager.

In the introduction section you should briefly explain why your research is relevant. You should state your research aim and research question (no surprises). Lastly, you should briefly describe how you structure your report.

In this section, you state or reference theories that underlie your research or the definitions of concepts that you employ in your study. It could also contain a description of the circumstances of your research, for example, a description of the company and its products you are evaluating the marketing concept for entry into the French market.

What is the current body of knowledge about your research aim? What models and empirical evidence already exist? What alternative explanations have been mentioned about the results? This leads to establishing the research gap that your research will (partially) fill. The literature review and theoretical background encompass the existing knowledge relevant to your argument.

Research design

In this section, start with (re-)stating your research aim and research question that should logically follow out of the detected research gap. Then you explain your research design, i.e., how you collect data, what data you collect and how you analyze this data.

A preliminary study usually encompasses all the sections up to this point. You have planned what you will do, and the remainder is the execution of this plan. In most universities, supervisors give you feedback about your preliminary study. If not, but your institution’s process allows for it, it is an excellent time to ask for such feedback. While executing your research design, it is usually no longer possible to introduce significant changes without infringing the consistency of your argumentation.

In this section, you present your results of your data collection and analysis. You only report the facts without interpreting and discussing them. If your methods of analysis required any validation or checking of assumptions, show the results of these checks, too.

In this section, you will interpret the results that you have found. What do the results mean? Do they answer your research question? What is the contribution of these results to the existing body of knowledge? Can you confirm previous findings? Are there any contradicting findings? Do your results change or put into perspective previous findings? What are the limitations of your research? Which of your decisions might have affected the results? Can future research address aspects differently? What alternative explanations would also be possible based on your results? What research question should or might future research address to tackle the remaining research gaps, eliminate alternative explanations, or otherwise generate intellectual contributions?

The discussion section really entails a discussion of arguments—existing ones and new ones based on your result interpretation—and counterarguments, pros and cons. This is the argumentation that leads to drawing your conclusion.

Depending on the aim of your research, you might also need to address the practical implications of the results and your interpretation. This might warrant a separate chapter, depending on the research question. Also, a part of the discussion section is devoted to critically reflecting on your research. What went well, and what did not? Where do we have to deviate from the planned research design? There is no clear distinction between these reflections and the limitations of your research apart from potential “lessons learned.”

In this section, you will sum up your research. Did you answer your research question? This answer allowed you to come up with arguments and draw a conclusion. This is the last point of your report. You can summarize what future research should investigate (in relation to your argumentation and conclusion). You can also list practical implications. All ideas, thoughts, etc., should remain the same in the conclusion section. Here it is especially important to avoid any surprises

4.4 Sections of the Research Report in Detail

In the following chapter, we present the purpose of each report section and provide some guidance on how to write them.

4.4.1 Management Summary

The management summary is the beginning of your report. It condenses your research design, results, arguments, and conclusions into a brief stand-alone one (or at most two) pager.

The management summary, also called the executive summary or abstract, summarizes the entire report. It enables any reader to read this summary alone without reading through the complete research report, thesis, or dissertation. It allows the reader to understand the essential information of the project report. It aims at persuading the reader that the document is worth being read. This abstract is the part that is often published in internet databases. So, it should be concise, complete, specific, and self-sufficient.

How to write

The management summary is a condensed version of the complete project report. Obviously, it can only be written when you have finished your report. So, it is the first chapter in your report, but the last one you can write.

It contains the essence of your introduction, theoretical background, literature review, research questions, methods, results, and discussion. You can use the following statements as a guideline. It might be a good idea to read through the following chapters about writing a research report, look at the purpose of each chapter, and then come back to this section.

The introduction will be condensed to establish the topic’s relevance: why you must be doing your research? This should be conveyed in one or two sentences.

The theoretical background is essentially reduced to mentioning the (leading) theory or theories you use. For example, you do not explain the principal-agent theory, but you state that your research is based on the principal-agent theory.

The literature review only refers to the research gap you detected through your literature review. So, you won’t be able to cite your sources in the review, but you will be able to summarize the research gap. If your research mainly aims to enlarge or contradict other research, it’s mandatory to name this research, but any information beyond that should be part of the introduction. You could use, for example, the following phrases (for a more elaborated overview, see Barros, 2016 ):

according to (or based on or summarizing) the literature review …,

the topic (or problem, question, phenomenon, element, etc.) XYZ deserves more research attention …,

most studies have focused mainly on the topic (or problem, question, phenomenon, element, etc.) XYZ …,

most of the work in this area has focused on the topic (or problem, question, phenomenon, element, etc.) XYZ …,

there is limited research investigating the topic (or problem, question, phenomenon, element, relationship, etc.) XYZ …, or

there is scant evidence (element, condition, relationship, etc.) XYZ exists (or is understood, behaves that way, is relevant, etc.)…

The research question should be stated in full.

The research design is described, including sampling, data collection, and data analysis methods applied to answer the research question:

The primary type of research design should be named—for example, cross-sectional research.

The data sources, sample, and sampling method should be briefly described, for example, 50 companies in the financial industry sector in Western Europe.

The data collection should be reduced to the method’s name, e.g., closed survey.

The data analysis method should also be reduced to the method’s name, e.g., regression analysis with element X as the dependent variable. All requirements testing and preliminary investigation should be excluded unless they yielded extraordinary results that affected your research.

The results are summarized as the results of your ultimate data analysis method. For example, the multiple regression analysis showed a significant impact of the independent variable XYZ. For quantitative data analysis methods, also mention impact size and explanatory power.

The discussion should be summarized in your most important arguments and interpretations of the results.

At the end of your management summary, you should state the conclusion drawn from your research. 

If your research project includes recommendations, include them as well (depending on your research design, this recommendation might be your conclusion).

The management summary is neither an introduction nor a verbal summary of the table of contents. It summarizes the project report (not the steps of the project). Usually, you provide the management summary on a separate page at the very beginning of the research report.

Your main report starts after the management summary. You do not have to guide the reader from the summary to the introduction, as the summary is supposed to stand alone.

4.4.2 Introduction

The introduction is the first section of the actual report. Gaining the readers’ attention and keeping it through expectation management and proper user guidance is key.

The purpose of the introduction is, first, to catch the reader’s interest. Explain why this topic is relevant to you and the reader. Why is it important? How did you come up with this research? It also shows the scope and direction of the paper, acting as a user’s guide for the reader. So, it delineates the entire story you plan to convey in the body of your research. Describe how you interpret and how you approach the topic at hand:

What do you consider a problem?

What is the research aim?

What is the research question?

As your report is a research paper, it is perfectly fine to state your research question and research aim in the introduction, so that everything that follows can be understood in light of those research questions. It should also indicate your type of conclusion and point of view. Again, in line with the directive of “no surprises”, try to make your conclusions and research understandable to the reader.

The introduction serves as a roadmap for the reader and helps them understand what you do in your research report, where you go, what you do to get there, and what the reader will see along the way. Everything must logically flow from a starting point; nothing should come as a surprise. The entire story is outlined in the introduction. Provide details only in the body of your report.

So, this is the foundation on which you build the logical next step to reach a conclusion that answers your research question. Try to keep the structure of the introduction simple. An effective way is to start with a rather general statement about the topic. And then gradually narrow down to the specific thesis in the form of the research question or the type of conclusion to be drawn. The length of the introduction depends on the overall length of the research paper. A rule of thumb is that the introduction should be no shorter than one-twelfth and not much longer than one-tenth of the total length. If the assignment is a 2000-word essay, the introduction should be between 160 and 200 words, while a 3500-word report should be between 290 and 350 words. There is no absolute rule for the length. Be as reasonable about it as you can.

The introduction contains the relevant background of the problem. You introduce relevant concepts of the research topic and significant research. You offer user guidance, an essay map, a thesis statement, or a research question. Brief and relevant background information shows how your topic fits into a larger framework and what approach you take. This can also guide your readers in the direction you like them to go. You can show your audience why the topic matters and create a map that includes the scope and direction of the research. The entire introduction is an essay map. Because the introduction serves as a guide for navigating the research paper, the statements usually begin with phrases such as “this report examines …” or “this essay will …” and “this article shows …”. We recommend that you adopt this strategy. So, do not forget to put the thesis statement in your introduction, so your reader has a clear idea of what it will be about. Also include the research questions or, depending on your research design, the hypothesis. Delineating the scope is also part of the introduction. Since you do not explain how the world works, you usually must delimit the research. So, decide on what you intentionally leave out.

Remember, a poorly written and poorly constructed introduction leaves your audience wondering how to move forward and navigate through your written report. Do not risk losing your reader’s goodwill from the beginning, no matter how well the rest of the paper is constructed. Thus, capture the reader’s interest and satisfy their needs of what they can expect from your research.

After the introduction where you have plotted the report, you guide the readers to the next section with a statement like “after having introduced the problem area and the research aim, I will now detail the theories underlying the further deliberations and the research design.”

4.4.3 Theoretical Background

In the theoretical background, you depict the foundations of your research: the theories you build your research on, the concepts and definitions you employ, and other background information (like a short description of the client, sponsor, or company being used as the case) necessary to understand and position your research.

The theoretical background lays the theoretical foundation for your research. So, the reader should know all theories that your project is based on and all the definitions of concepts you use afterward. With management and business administration as applied sciences, only a few elaborated theoretical concepts may apply to your research. Usually, you start with a theory that the reader should know. Also, there indeed are concepts and definitions to present.

In the theoretical background section, you describe the theories you base your project on. You need to focus on the relevant aspects of these theories in your research. You can assume that the reader knows about the content of the elaborated theories in your field. So just highlighting the key elements regarding the relevance to your research project is usually enough. Refrain from telling the audience that this is something that they should already know. Describe the theories based on the major papers that made up or established, adjusted, or refined these theories as sources.

Remember that we define theory rather widely. Your assumptions, especially about cause-effect relationships, are also part of the theoretical background. It might help to draw a picture of the assumed relationships, like a causal path diagram (Pearl & Mackenzie, 2018 ). This will support your later reasoning about how to treat different constructs and their proxies.

Sometimes, it might be helpful to establish or to introduce a section called “background,” where you provide a more detailed background or additional information about your research than you could do in the introduction. For example, describe the company that represents your unit of analysis, or introduce the problem that your design science research addresses. So, build the foundation for your thoughts that will follow. This foundation might be valuable to the reader. For example, to understand a case research design that aims to describe the case comprehensively, this “background” information also contributes to the comprehensive description. Introducing this information already in this chapter rather than later in the results section makes understanding your thoughts easier for the reader. It may enhance your argumentation and explanations, specifically if the unit of analysis is not the entire company but only a part of it (e.g., a department or a strategic business unit).

After having introduced the theoretical background of your research, you guide the readers to the literature review. You could use phrases like “after having described the theoretical foundations for this research, I will now present and critically annotate the current state of research relevant to my research area in the literature review.”

4.4.4 Literature Review

The literature review collects, comments, and criticizes existing research in the relevant field to make an argument for the relevance of your research and its design.

The purpose of the literature review is twofold. First, you need to be aware of the body of knowledge to consider your intellectual contribution. You need to be familiar with the current state of research in your area of interest. So, collect information about previous research questions, methods, findings, and conclusions. This is the primary purpose of conducting the literature review. Second, the literature review justifies your research. You can show what has not yet been covered in the current research. This leads to the research gap that you plan to close with your research. Convince your reader that you substantially contribute to the body of knowledge.

How to gather the information

Standard sources for searching for literature are databases. These databases offer access to many scientific and professional journals. Which databases you might have access to depends on your organization. If your databases do not show enough relevant research results, you may visit university libraries that provide access to those missing databases. Promising databases for research in business and management are, for example:

Academic Search Premier (EBSCO)

ABI/Inform Complete

Business Source Complete (EBSCO)

EconLit (EBSCO)

Factiva (Dow Jones)

Google Scholar

JSTOR (ITHAKA)

Nexis Uni (LexisNexis).

What to look for

You usually start looking for keywords and authors in the field. The aim is to find all the relevant body of knowledge studies. The number of articles in your literature review depends on your research and the length of your project. The literature review for a doctoral dissertation needs to be more thorough than a bachelor’s thesis. The often-heard question, “How many articles do I have to include in my literature review?” is unanswerable by your supervisor and strongly hints at an utterly faulty understanding of the purpose of the literature review. You need to review sufficient articles to grasp the body of knowledge and convince your reader that your research is justified. You can only define a gap in the body of knowledge by the knowledge bordering this gap, as the absence of anything else determines a vacuum.

A vital tool to approach a literature review is a keyword list with the essential terms in your field. Here it is beneficial to be specific and to add synonyms to your list. “Accounting” is a generic term, whereas “management accounting” is more focused. However, “managerial accounting,” “cost accounting,” or “costing” might be used instead of “management accounting.” A potentially enriching addition might be a search for “state-of-the-art,” “meta-analysis,” or “literature review” to get meta-studies about other studies in the field.

Another approach–usually used in combination with the keywords–is to look for known authors in your field of research. You will find these authors in textbooks and the literature reviews of articles you have already found (there, you might also find additional keywords and synonyms). To look for known authors should not replace a keyword search to prevent you from overlooking relevant research by other authors. Still, it might be an excellent check for your keyword search: if the results of your keyword search do not include the already known authors (or articles), your keyword search is still lacking.

Establishing a search string

The literature search with keywords rarely results in a manageable or relevant list of literature. So, you’ll need to refine your research using search strings. The details differ slightly between databases, but the search strings are based on Boolean operations, especially AND, OR, and NOT. Any database query yields a list of data entries (articles) that meet the search string (for example, the keyword “costing” in the field “title”); this means that the condition “keyword is contained in the title” is TRUE. With the help of Boolean operators, this condition can be stated increasingly precisely (see Table 4.1 ).

For example, if you look for “management accounting” and want to include the synonyms from above your search string would look like this: (“management accounting” OR “managerial accounting” OR “cost accounting” OR “costing”).

How to compile the information

Many research reports need an in-depth literature review. Students oftentimes have problems establishing such a review even after criticism from their supervisors or readers because of an unsystematic or not existing information collection. After gathering all the relevant articles, you’ll need to keep the relevant information, for example, in a table. Things to look for (and to keep) are:

Reference number (for internal referencing),

Year of publication

Ranking of the journals

Number of citations in other research reports/articles

Empirical evidence (yes/no)

Theoretical deduction (yes/no)

Research objective

Research question(s) (Hypothesis, if applicable)

characterization (country, industry, stock exchange, etc.)

Constructs and proxies

constructs included

proxies used for constructs

Data collection method

primary/secondary data

operationalization (calculation, characterization, and retrieval specification)

handling of outliers

year(s) of data

Data analysis method

quantitative or qualitative

testing of requirements executed and successful

auxiliary means or tools

complete results

significance

impact size

power of explanation

categories used

qualitative results

interpretation of the results

alternative explanations

limitations of the study (according to the author)

recommended future research

major argument made

Grouping of literature according to (list of reference numbers in the same group)

sample characteristics

research design

data collection

data analysis

proxies used

additional ones depending on the preliminary research gap and the argument for your research

Your annotation (your opinion) (as part of the literature review)

academically sound argument (yes/no)

(potentially) to be used in your presentation of the literature review in detail (yes or no)

(potentially) to be used in your presentation of the literature review as a reference (yes or no)

reason for your evaluation in bullet points

interesting literature referenced (to include in your literature review)

(potential) constructs to include in your research

(potential) proxies to use in your research

(potential) research gap detected/ideas for your research

(potentially) to be used in your discussion (because it makes a good argument) (for or against).

As already mentioned, the literature review section in your report must fulfill two purposes:

You are conveying the impression that your knowledge about the topic is up to date.

You are making a convincing argument for the intellectual contribution of your research.

You can achieve the first purpose by summarizing the state-of-the-art by lumping all research together (for example, existing empirical evidence is unanimous) or dividing them using the argument being made (for example, existing empirical evidence is unconvincing or conflicting). By structuring the state-of-the-art presentation, you can prepare the argument for your research.

Depending on your paper’s length, the state-of-the-art presentation will vary greatly. In a journal article, you usually only present the reference, the results (often, unfortunately, only as significance levels), and the argument (conclusion). In a bachelor’s or master’s thesis, you should usually present exemplary research studies providing many details and then group the other research based on their similarity to the exemplarily presented one (same argument, same research question, same research design).

Suitable candidates for a full representation in your literature review are studies that:

Have been published in a high-ranked journal

Have been cited many times

Provide a lot of information about the research itself

You understood completely

Made a good argument.

The above grouping ensures you avoid boring the reader but still use most or even all the articles you have read. Based on the summary of the state-of-the-art, you must argue for your research. Your primary argument for your research is your detected research gap, and the research gap summarizes the literature review about the absence of knowledge.

Research gap

Usually, the research gap is the last section of the literature review. To make a strong argument for your research, it is essential to realize that the literature review, the research gap, the research aim, the research question, and the research design form one linear string with one step flowing logically from another.

Thus, in presenting the knowledge, you already prepare to delineate the gap, i.e., the missing knowledge. The presentation of the research gap allows you to argue for the intellectual contribution you plan to provide with your research. The more powerful the intellectual contribution, the better the argument. Referring to the section about intellectual contribution, there are several possibilities in (roughly) ascending order (first options producing smaller intellectual contributions):

Replication of an already conducted study to verify the achieved results

without changes

using a different sample

using different proxies and operationalizations

Excluding alternative explanations

Including different constructs

Resolving conflicting results

Refining (creation, elaboration, and testing of theories).

Depending on the aim of your module or course, the level of your program (undergraduate, graduate), and your institution, the requirements for intellectual contributions may differ. This adds to the necessity to argue for your research.

For example, using a sample from a country not researched in prior studies is a relatively weak argument. However, hypothesizing that conflicting results might be caused by so far neglected characteristics of a particular country may be meaningful. So, including this specific characteristic from another country might enable you to develop a stronger argument. For example, do not argue that until now, the impact of women on the Board of Directors on company performance has not yet been researched in Switzerland. Instead, say that ambiguous results for this question might exist because of different cultures (i.e., women’s opinions voiced and heard in public). A cultural trait in Switzerland might be that women speak up and are heard in public. Thus, it should be detectable if an impact on company performance exists in a country like Switzerland.

Based on your literature review, you can use the recommended future research or the limitations of previous research as a starting point. Depending on the quality of those studies, these are already extensive. Hopefully, you found additional alternative explanations for the presented results in your annotations. Those alternative explanations offer the potential for a significant intellectual contribution. For example, studies about diversity might show lower average salaries based on gender (women) and ethnicity. An alternative explanation might be education and experience, which often is lower for non-white persons (education) and smaller in years for women because they are often tasked with raising a family.

The description of the research gap is the first part where you contribute to the body of knowledge, as you state what this body lacks. Here you can show creativity and academic understanding. This is the foundation of your research, so it is essential to make it strong.

After having reviewed the relevant studies in the literature review and depicted the research gap, you guide the readers to your research design and how you plan to close that gap: “after having presented the research gap, I will now depict the design of my research to close this gap.”

4.4.5 Research Design

The research design details all decisions that specify the execution of the research, including the reasons for them. This results in said “blueprint,” enabling other researchers to replicate your research.

4.4.5.1 Purpose

This section aims to describe your plan for your research. It contains your research design. Hence, it should be labeled “research design” to reflect its content. However, the label “method section” is well established. Here you describe what you like to achieve and what you do in your research. You show replicability as one quality criterion of science in this section. So, using the information provided here, anybody else should be able to replicate your research.

4.4.5.2 How to Write

Research aim.

The research design section usually starts with the research aim. The research aim is the intellectual contribution you want to achieve (i.e., the argument you like to make). The research aim is based on the research gap at the literature review’s end. Your goal can be to close only some of the gap, as it may be impossible to complete the entire gap in your study. In the broadest sense, your goal is to contribute to closing parts of the research gap.

The research aim is the general description of what you want to achieve with your research and is substantiated by the research question. The research aim states the desired intellectual contribution of your research. (see Sect. 2.3 for types of intellectual contribution). The conclusion you like to draw at the end of your research refers to this aim, drawing on the argument your research generated. (for an overview of the intellectual contribution of each research design, see section Sect. 2.1 .).

At first glance, the difference between the research aims and the research questions is little or neglectable. However, it is an essential step in the logical sequence.

Research question

The research question is the specific, detailed, and fully developed question you answer. You will accomplish the research aim by answering the research question. Formulating the research question is a powerful sign of the research design you need for answering the research question. As we introduced in Chap. 3 , the statement of the research questions results from an iterative process. It should always be a “working” research question. Depending on the different decisions in this method section, you might adapt or sharpen your research question. In some research designs, the research question is a hypothesis that will be tested.

Sometimes, students turn upside down the relationship between the research question and the research aim. Based on this question, they start with the research question and detail the goals they want to achieve. First, this leads to a logical leap between the research gap and the research question, as the question does not immediately follow from the gap. Second, the research question must be more focused to diminish this leap. Third, by trying to find goals substantiating the question, they either state the distinct steps of the research process as objectives or invent additional objectives that either dilute the focus of the research or are not even attainable, raising wrong expectations.

(Type of) research design

The (type of) research design briefly describes the basic design your study will follow and the general direction of your decisions about your research. Your specific research design, and the specific choices you made, will be described in the following sections. But in line with the “no surprises” and “user guidance” directive, it enhances the understandability of your specific decisions if you briefly present the type of your research design. Your kind of research design in business and management is usually one out of the list below:

Design science research design

Action research design

Single case research design

Multiple case research design

Cross-sectional research design

Longitudinal research design

Experimental research design

Literature review research design

Staggered research design.

We describe these research designs in Chap. 5 ff. Most types of research designs can employ different methodologies. If you use one of these methodologies, present it here (e.g., an event study as a longitudinal study). If you did not find your intended (type of) research design in the list above, refer to the research designs in Chap. 5 to see if we have labeled it as a methodology within a research design.

The choice of the research design results from your research question. It should be immediately apparent that the research question and the (type of) research design fit together. For example, “Does mental fatigue impair decision quality? Conclusion from experimental research” fits, whereas “Does Corporate Social Responsibility improve corporate performance? A case study” does not. Suppose they do not, then you have to reconsider the wording of your research question or to choose another research design. This “fit” is the most critical determinant of the validity of your research. If you cannot achieve this “fit” regarding this fundamental question, no subsequent decision will compensate for it. Consequently, your conclusion validity will be severely compromised, at the very least, if you can achieve any.

Sample and sources

As part of the research design section, describe the choice of the sample and data source(s). Argue why this source or that sample meets the aim of your research project. Specifically, if collecting qualitative data from non-random sources, the selection and access to the sources (for example, interviewees) are essential. For example, if you are conducting a case study about “How environmental considerations impact management decisions at XYZ,” getting the C-suite managers to participate is an absolute must. If you cannot use them as sources, you must abolish your research as you will not get the pertinent information.

To phrase it positively, here you argue that and why you can collect the information from the sources you target. This also holds for quantitative data, even retrieved from databases. Because of the choice of the source or the sample, your data might be inherently biased.

You might even use a cleverly chosen sample to prevent or exclude a lot of counterarguments and alternative explanations. For example, in the impact discussion of the balanced scorecard on a firm’s performance, a significant counterargument for the absence of a relationship has been that the BSC might not have been correctly implemented. For this reason, Früh et al. ( 2019 ) examined the companies in the BSC Hall of Fame of the Palladium Group, the Kaplan and Norton consulting group. Here, the companies are listed that the BSC’s inventors assessed as having excelled in implementing the BSC. So, the alternative explanation “not correctly implemented” for this sample should not apply. Hence, the absence of a relationship between BSC and corporate performance cannot be explained away using this counterargument.

Data collection

What data or information do you collect? This requires a description of the concepts and constructs used as well as the proxies used. For all data, be it qualitative or quantitative, you need to operationalize the data collection.

First, consider what information you need for your research and gather ideas about where (see sample and sources) and how to retrieve them. This information refers to the constructs or elements you use in your research. You establish an information guideline (analog to an interview guide) listing the information you want to collect and how you plan to get the data (for example, by using proxies or asking specific questions.)

Let us take company size, for example. If, based on the theoretical background and literature review, company size is an important or at least relevant construct for your research, you must gather size-related information. The next question is, what information do you need about company size? Do you look for absolute or relative values, a categorization (e.g., big, medium, small), observable facts, or opinions (whose)? What proxies do you use for non-observable constructs? These might include market value, revenue, net operating assets, balance sheet total, and employees. How do you operationalize the proxies? Do you equal employees to full-time equivalents? Do you look at the beginning of the period, the end of the period, or an average? Do you consider worldwide revenue or only the revenue in the respective country? How do you transform this data into information about the size? Do you only take one proxy or a combination of several? What is your combination rule? Two out of three (one representative to be omitted, for example, for companies with high revenue and NOAs, but a small number of employees). How do you combine proxies (revenue and NOA and market capitalization)?

This process helps to define the constructs more clearly. We might look at size from an economic perspective, a customer perspective, and a self-image perspective, among others. You need to define what you mean and need for your research or if you are looking for information on all aspects of the general construct.

As the example about “size” might give the impression that quantitative data might have an edge on opinion-based information, let us look at different examples: “digitalization” is a multifaceted construct for which only a few accepted quantitative proxies exist, if any. Thus, information is gathered for all facets, usually based on opinions, and then combined. This might change as the construct of “digitalization” becomes more apparent (which would be an intellectual contribution or scientific progress).

More abstractly, disclose the operationalization of your data retrieval (e.g., which data, from what sources, what periods). Then, show how you transform these data into proxies of a single construct and which proxies you used to represent the construct (and perhaps even which did not). If you have multiple proxies for a construct, explain how you transform the proxies and assess the construct on the corresponding measurement scale. During the entire process, you might be prone to biases that you should reflect on and evaluate their potential impact on your choices. Figure 4.1 summarizes this process and stresses that the constructs we use are often not directly observable, and they flow from a complex process requiring many decisions by the researcher.

Constructs as the result of operationalization, transformation, and assessment

Innovation could act as a more balanced example of a construct in the sense that the options for decisions are very diverse. Information about innovation could include:

The number of patents

R&D expenditures

Sales of products and services less than three years old

Number of internal improvement suggestions made or implemented

Time to market products

Cycle time of projects

“Attitude” of employees toward change

Self-assessment of R&D staff or marketing staff

Assessment of customers.

These examples raise awareness that this information guide is a matter of concern. We provide more detailed examples in the next section. Because of the different aspects and interpretations of the constructs, it is more than a list of used constructs but a specification of what we want to know from our sources. Depending on the research design, this information guideline may focus more on the choice of proxies and operationalization or more on the different aspects of the constructs.

The distinction between qualitative and quantitative data is misleading because it can change during data transformation. For example, one could count the use of the term “strategic” and thus turn qualitative data into quantitative data, or one could divide income into levels above and below $40,000 and thus turn quantitative data into qualitative (categorical) data. Let us provide more insight into the peculiarities of collecting quantitative and qualitative data. Of course, if you convert the data type, all the above issues may become relevant.

Proxies can always be argued based on the literature review: you decide to follow examples from literature or change something as part of your intellectual contribution. It would be best to operationalize the data collection by clearly stating retrieval, allocation, transformation, and calculation procedures.

What data did you retrieve from where in which format or dimension (e.g., number of employees at the end of the period, collected as headcount)? However, is the end of a period for all elements the same (i.e., end of the year), or is it the end of the reporting period? Which data did you allocate or group into data sets? For example, do you group headcount at the end of period 202X into the data set of 202X or 202Y? Figure 4.2 illustrates this (simple) example.

From data to proxy to construct (example)

This example focused on the decision of what data to select as the single proxy for the construct. It gets a bit more complex if you have to choose the data and transform it to develop the proxy. How do you transform data? For example, if a woman is elected to the Board of Directors at the general assembly in May and starts in July, is she on the board for this period? Do you collect data on whether women are on the board (yes or no), the number of women on the board (does newly elected count as 0.5?), or months on the board divided by twelve? What happens with resignations and elections that also change the number of board members?

Unexperienced researchers may assume that these challenges do not happen with (pure) quantitative data. But this is not true. You often must calculate proxies based on retrieved data (or if you retrieve data ask yourself how it has been calculated). For example, how do you calculate return on equity? Is profit divided by average, initial, and final equity (including period profit)? Or how do you determine (i.e., calculate) economic value added (EVA) or Tobin’s q? How do you handle EVA conversions, and which? Figure 4.3 stresses that proxies are often derived from retrieved data, and you must explain this transformation process.

Operationalized data is transformed to generate a proxy.

It makes sense to distinguish between directly retrieved data used as proxies and calculated and transformed ones. The latter might also be included in the data analysis part, as it is unclear whether the transformation process is part of data collection or analysis.

Going one step further, constructs can be represented by a combination of proxies. Often, they gain substance and comprehensiveness if they are represented by more than one proxy. But then we must disclose any reason for the transformation process to achieve the combination. We must consider the measurement scale, primarily if the proxies use different scales.

For example, company size in period x is depicted with three proxies:

market capitalization by end of June,

revenue of period, and

the average number of full-time-equivalents (FTEs) in the period.

The construct company size then is assessed by the following assessment rule.

The company counts as big if 2 out of three proxies surpass these thresholds [to be specified] for proxies 1, 2, and 3,

The company counts as small if 2 out of three proxies do not surpass these above thresholds for proxies 1, 2, and 3 (see also Fig. 4.4 ).

Proxies are transformed and assessed to represent the construct.

Please note that the definition of establishing the threshold is based on an assessment of counts (“big” and “small”). This addresses the same issue as in the example above about the newly elected board members: are they counted in the period they got elected?

Another issue is that we indeed gained a better-specified construct. However, we lost information because of the change in the measurement scale and our inability to combine the proxies. Here, we face a trade-off between construct validity and the measurement precision (of a single proxy). Researchers must realize that these issues refer to quantitative data, proxies, and constructs. We like to stress that the same issues are equally relevant for qualitative data. Table 4.2 shows an example (referring to the success of a product’s market introduction) of such an operationalization.

The example above does not depict the content of the interview but represents the operationalization of its retrieval. The content plus the operationalized retrieval results in a data set. The transformation of this data set, the biases in the collected data, and the transformation process needs also to be disclosed. Referring to the example in Table 4.2 , this might look like this:

Facial expressions were recorded but not included in transcription nor assessed.

Body language is not observable due to the Zoom session and camera perspective.

Speech patterns and idiosyncrasies (“ah, …”, pauses, etc.) were recorded but not included in transcription nor assessed.

No objective data on success was collected.

Mr. or Ms. Miller oversaw the market introduction: potential self-confirmation bias.

The transcript of the interview is the proxy of the interview itself. In the above example, you further analyze the transcript, not the interview. As with quantitative data, you need to describe which constructs you like to use or what information you like to retrieve. We term this procedure the information guideline corresponding to the well-established interview guideline (e.g., Yin, 2013 ). In the Information guideline, you describe what information you are looking for and gather ideas about where and how to collect them.

For primary data collection, the questions asked are a critical operationalization of the information guideline. The more structured the data collection is, the more important become the actual questions asked. For unstructured data collection, these questions are only the starting point for the researcher that will be further elaborated on. This information must be included in the main report, not in the appendix.

Data analysis

Specify the method you use to analyze the data. Refrain from explaining this method to the reader, as you can assume the reader is familiar with these methods. Make sure to reason that the data analysis method is consistent with the research aim, research question, and data collection. This is a crucial test for students. Experienced researchers usually aim for the maximum intellectual contribution they can accomplish. However, students often need help with the data analysis method. This may lead to poor choices of data analysis methods for the planned research.

Particularly as an undergraduate, you face some limitations regarding the availability of methods. Your supervisors know these limitations (e.g., a specific method is taught in a later semester). We recommend that you talk with your supervisors about how you can tackle these discrepancies. An adequate solution is usually to state clearly that you are aware that another method of data analysis would be more appropriate but that you cannot use that method because of your current limitations. Of course, it would be even better if you familiarize yourself with the peculiarities of the appropriate method, as there is some guidance on this. You can find guidelines for beginners on selecting the proper method, specifically for quantitative or categorical data. You probably know this from your statistics courses. Figure 4.5 illustrates standard analytical methods for different types and numbers of variables.

(Adopted from Field, 2020 )

Analytical methods for different types and numbers of variables.

As you can see in the picture, the choice of the data type has a tremendous impact on the method of data analysis in statistics. You should also include decision criteria if decisions are to be made (e.g., rejecting a hypothesis.) This holds especially true for qualitative data you categorize (how to allocate data to a category?), evaluate, interpret (is this data affirmative or not?), and assess in your research project.

Remember that methods also make progress. The above table categorizes often-used classical statistical methods based on the belief that the whole truth lies in the data and that correlation does not establish causation. More modern approaches try to infer kinds of causation from some correlations, acknowledging that prior assumptions impact the results of an analysis (see, for example, Pearl & MacKenzie, 2018 , and the referenced literature there). 

Sample adjustments

Data collection and the chosen data analysis method often require an adjustment of the sample. Usual reasons are the insufficient quality of the data, for example, incomplete data sets (missing values or answers) and outliers (data that would bias the result, if included). You must describe the reasons and the methods of sample adjustments (for example, if data is to be considered an outlier and how you handle outliers).

The reasons need to be consistent with your method of analysis. For example, if you retrieve data for five periods but do not use those periods as a control or independent variable, it makes no sense to exclude companies for which you do not have the data for all five years.

In quantitative methods, sample adjustments are standard. At first glance, this seems irrelevant to qualitative methods. But what do you do with data from an interview that you consider not containing the truth (for example, the interviewee purposely trying to disseminate wrong or inaccurate information)? We conclude that the same reasoning as with quantitative outliers applies.

Requirements check

Many data analysis methods require the data to meet specific requirements (e.g., normally distributed data, linearity, autocorrelation, homoscedasticity). You must list all the requirements and how you check them.

Mixed data analysis

The method sections become rather intricate if you apply several methods. You go through all the issues mentioned for each method and source and describe how you combine the results of the different data analyses.

After showing the blueprint for the research, it is time to explain the results produced by executing the plan. The results of the execution of the here described research design are depicted in the next section.

4.4.6 Results

In the result section, (all) the findings of executing the research design are depicted. If the blueprint describes how to build a wall, the results section contains a picture and other properties of the built wall,  but without any interpretation (like “nice looking” and “not thick enough” of the wall).

This section writes down your study’s replicable results with no interpretation, alliterations, comments, or exclusions. You applied the method described in the method section, which produced this outcome. If other researchers used the same methods, they should have the same result.

You can use the same structure as in the methods section and present the results piece by piece. The better you prepare your method section, the easier it is to write this section. If, for any reason, you deviated from or adjusted the methods you had planned in the method section, you need to list the causes and the adjustments here in the result section.

Sample and data collection

You retrieved data on [dates] from [sources] by (survey, download, interview, observation, and participation) and got [number] of data sets. You calculated and transformed these data to generate additional data/category allocation, etc. Also, you adjusted the sample using the described methods and decision rules. This led to the following adjustments: the number of elimination of sources/data sets; the number of data adjustments from to. This resulted in a sample of [number] of data sets.

You might use different adjustments to achieve alternative data sets for further analyses, and you’ll need to explain this here, too. If you think it’s appropriate, you can present a description of the data (descriptive statistics) or an example of the data sets used.

There are two different results you need to show. The first refers to the requirements of the chosen data-analyzing method. For each condition, describe the result of testing for the requirement, the decision criteria for acceptance and rejection, and state if your data meets the requirement.

If requirements are not met, you can try to adjust the data set, for example, use a logarithmic scale or the analysis method with less severe requirements. Of course, you must also reason this well.

If all the requirements are met, you present the results of the data analysis. After the result section, where you give the bare findings, you guide the readers to the discussion section, where you interpret and comment on them. For example, you may write the following transition: “having depicted the results produced by applying the research design, I will discuss the results in the following section.”

4.4.7 Discussion

In the discussion section, you interpret and review the results. Here you go ahead and deliberate and develop your arguments. Also, your comment on the “wall” (referring to the metaphor introduced in Sect. 4.4.6 ), whether you think it is stable, nice, and in the right place.

In this section, you interpret and comment on the results of the last section: what do the achieved results mean for the existing body of knowledge? In this section, you develop and formulate your argument. You show your scientific understanding by presenting your intellectual contribution accomplished by your research.

Many students face problems writing this section and cannot show that they can generate an intellectual contribution . Research is not primarily about convincing your supervisor that you are familiar with so-called scientific methods (e.g., statistical methods).

The discussion section provides your critical interpretation of the research results. Explain your reasoning and state your opinion. So, using the first person singular (if you write independently) or plural (if you write as a team) is appropriate.

Questions you should address in your discussion are:

What do your results mean? Explain and asses your results. For example, an adjusted R 2 of 5% does tell what? First, you can explain 5% of the variation of the dependent variable by the independent variables in your model, which also means you cannot explain 95% variation. Second, you can conclude the following about your research question: despite being significant and rejecting the H1 Hypothesis, the model’s explanatory power is meager.

Have your decisions paid off? You have included/excluded constructs, proxies, operationalization, used sources, etc. Reflect critically on whether any of those decisions added to the body of knowledge and seem reasonable with hindsight. You specifically looked for artifacts to understand the company culture. Do you know if this yielded insights you would have missed if you had foregone this source? You use another proxy for capturing “size.” What was the impact of this change?

What went well and what did not? Did you detect a piece of game-changing information in the last interview, and you could not re-interview the 15 former interviewees? Does this affect the validity of the data gathered? Did the sequencing of the questions in your survey cause an anchoring bias? Did some participants misunderstand question “5”? Did you contact person X, whom you requested confirmation about Y’s statement from? Did you run into problems while transforming the data? Did you categorize your data into somewhat arbitrary groups? (E.g., you divided into below-average and above-average data, but 30% of your data is between ±5%, leading to data sets that are very close to your categorization criterion but are allocated to different categories).

What would you do differently next time? This can also be grouped with other ideas about future research.

Are the results in line with the empirical evidence you reviewed in your literature review? Have you expected them or not? If your literature review showed a diverse picture with inconclusive findings, you could compare the literature findings with your results. You might have some ideas why your findings corroborate some aspects of the previous research but conflict with another one. This might be a theory (refinement) or reasonable speculation; both might be good input for future research.

Are the results in line with the existing theories that you addressed in your theoretical background? Can you refine the theory based on your results? Can you resolve conflicting findings? You can apply the same comparison that you did in your literature review.

Are there alternative explanations for your results? Have you found unaddressed biases responsible for your result? Have you used constructs that are not unambiguously defined? Are the proxies you used good representations of the constructs, or do they (additionally) represent other constructs? Have you overlooked other constructs affecting the included constructs directly or indirectly? Ideally, you would have considered and resolved all these issues by designing your study, but that is unrealistic. A huge grey-shaded area exists between the two extremes, “blatant design error” and “strike of creative genius.” Even if you made a “blatant design error,” those are much easier to detect in hindsight. It is preferable to realize and concede that your design had some flaws or room for improvement than to hope that other researchers or supervisors do not detect these issues. Not everything can be realized ex-ante. The research process might generate creative alternative approaches and insights. Here you can present those insights.

Does your research explain empirical evidence detected in other studies?

What are the limitations of your study? Which are based on your design decisions, and which are based on the results of the empirical evidence?

What is the answer to your research question?

Have you accomplished your research aim? What is the argument that you can make? And what argument are you not able to make?

What parts of the research gap did you close, partially close, and which are still open? Has your research revealed new and additional gaps?

What do you recommend for future research? Based on the discussion of your results, you conclude what arguments your research produced. Every interpretation and every comment you judged as “this might be” is potentially relevant for future research.

How does your result change the existing body of knowledge?

Including your new argument, what are the existing arguments for and against your conclusion?

Here is a structure for your discussion that might also help you organize your thoughts:

The discussion draws on your results: the results have shown…,

Your interpretation of the results: this means…,

Alternative explanations: these results generated might be the effect of…,

Discussion and problems of the choices about methods and processes used: I encountered the following problems…, and

Future research: future research topics might be…

After having discussed your findings and arguments, you can draw your conclusion from these arguments and literally conclude your report. Guide your readers to this conclusion in the conclusion section.

4.4.8 Conclusion

In the conclusion section, you draw your conclusion based on the arguments you produced. So that you know—the conclusion section finishes your report.

The purpose of the conclusion is to present the bottom line of your research: the argument you concluded based on your research design, the results, and their discussion. You started your research to make an argument, and the argument you can make based on your research is your study’s conclusion, representing your intellectual contribution.

Repeat your research aim and the argument you had planned to develop. Contrast this argument with the actual argument you could accomplish based on your research. Briefly delineate the significant deviations and what is lacking to make the desired argument.

Remember that in scientific publications, nothing should come as a surprise. So, refrain from including new information or thoughts in your conclusion. Everything needs to be already presented and argued for in the discussion section. In this sense, the conclusion must be repetitive (remember, the argument is also part of the management summary). This is the conclusion of your research in the word’s literal meaning. Without stating a conclusion, the argument underpinned with many thoughts that you contribute to the academic discussion misses an ultimate point and closure.

Now, you have (almost) finished your report. It provides a comprehensive account of your research that encompasses the discussion of the results and the conclusions drawn. Your research report still needs the required indexes (e.g., bibliography and appendices). We do not further expand on the formal requirements for a research report and refer to the specialized literature (see “recommended literature”).

Key Aspects to Remember

Nothing should come as a surprise to the reader

You do not write a drama or crime story, and no suspense is built. This does not mean that academic texts must be boring, but the interest stems from the research question and how it gets answered. We want you to know that the reader is interested in your conclusion and process of argumentation. Nothing should surprise the reader, but everything should be explained: why you are doing what you are doing, where you are in your report, and what comes next. “No surprises” also hold to your discussion of arguments. Do not explain to the reader that your findings align with the results of researcher Jane or John Doe if this study drops out of the blue. Mention it in your literature review first.

Your opinion is a crucial part of the intellectual contribution

You are the researcher. It is your research project, and you conduct a research project and decide along the way. It is not only perfectly legit to state your opinions but also a necessity and a significant part of your intellectual contribution. The only thing to remember is that it must be abundantly clear what somebody else did, thought, etc., and what you did, found out, thought, decided, etc. The critical reflection of other’s research studies and your findings in the light of what other researchers found out is an essential and integral part of your report. Without that, your intellectual contribution would be critically diminished.

Understand the importance of an excellent introduction

The purpose of the introduction is, first, to catch the reader’s interest! You must explain why this topic is relevant to you, as well as to the reader. Why is it important? How did you come up with this research? It also shows the scope and direction of the paper, acting as a user’s guide for the reader. So, it should delineate the entire story you will tell in the body of your research. Describe how you interpret and approach the topic at hand. As your report is a research paper, it is beneficial to state your research question and objective in the introduction so that everything that follows can be understood in light of that research question. It should also indicate your type of conclusion and point of view.

Put enough emphasis on the discussion chapter

In this critical section, you interpret and comment on the results section’s results: what do the achieved results mean for the existing body of knowledge? In this section, you develop and formulate your argument. You show your scientific acumen by presenting your intellectual contribution to your research. This chapter is significant for supervisors, who can quickly assess your scientific skills. Our recommendation is to spend enough time on this chapter!

Critical Thinking Questions

Why is it important that nothing comes as a surprise to the reader in a research project?

What is the difference between a plain summary of your project and a management summary?

What are the major differences between the sections “results” and “discussion”?

What are the primary purposes of a literature review?

What would you consider the most important aspects of “scientific writing”?

Recommendations for further Readings

Field, A. (2016). An adventure in statistics. The reality enigma . SAGE.

Field, A. (2020). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5. ed.). SAGE.

Howe, S. & Henriksson, K. (2007). Phrasebook for writing papers and research in English. Over 5000 words and phrases to help you write at university and research level in English (4 edn.). EnglishforResearch.com.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M. & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis—A methods sourcebook . SAGE.

Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). SAGE.

Barros, L. O. (2016). The only academic phrasebook you’ll ever need . Createspace Independent Publishing Platform.

Morley, J. (2020). Academic Phrasebank: An academic writing resource for students and researchers . The university of Manchester.

Google Scholar  

Field, A. (2020). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE.

Früh, M., Keimer, I., & Blankenagel, M. (2019). The impact of Balanced Scorecard excellence on shareholder returns. IFZ Working Paper No. 0003/2019. https://zenodo.org/record/2571603#.YMDUafkzZaQ . Accessed: 9 June 2021.

Pearl, J., & Mackenzie, D. (2018). The book of why: The new science of cause and effect. Basic Books.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Wirtschaft/IFZ, Campus Zug-Rotkreuz, Hochschule Luzern, Zug-Rotkreuz, Zug, Switzerland

Stefan Hunziker & Michael Blankenagel

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Hunziker .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Hunziker, S., Blankenagel, M. (2024). Writing up a Research Report. In: Research Design in Business and Management. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42739-9_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42739-9_4

Published : 04 January 2024

Publisher Name : Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

Print ISBN : 978-3-658-42738-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-658-42739-9

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research

Research Reports: Definition and How to Write Them

Reports are usually spread across a vast horizon of topics but are focused on communicating information about a particular topic and a niche target market. The primary motive of research reports is to convey integral details about a study for marketers to consider while designing new strategies.

Certain events, facts, and other information based on incidents need to be relayed to the people in charge, and creating research reports is the most effective communication tool. Ideal research reports are extremely accurate in the offered information with a clear objective and conclusion. These reports should have a clean and structured format to relay information effectively.

What are Research Reports?

Research reports are recorded data prepared by researchers or statisticians after analyzing the information gathered by conducting organized research, typically in the form of surveys or qualitative methods .

A research report is a reliable source to recount details about a conducted research. It is most often considered to be a true testimony of all the work done to garner specificities of research.

The various sections of a research report are:

• Background/Introduction
• Implemented Methods
• Results based on Analysis
• Deliberation

Learn more: Quantitative Research

Components of Research Reports

Research is imperative for launching a new product/service or a new feature. The markets today are extremely volatile and competitive due to new entrants every day who may or may not provide effective products. An organization needs to make the right decisions at the right time to be relevant in such a market with updated products that suffice customer demands.

The details of a research report may change with the purpose of research but the main components of a report will remain constant. The research approach of the market researcher also influences the style of writing reports. Here are seven main components of a productive research report:

• Research Report Summary: The entire objective along with the overview of research are to be included in a summary which is a couple of paragraphs in length. All the multiple components of the research are explained in brief under the report summary.  It should be interesting enough to capture all the key elements of the report.
• Research Introduction: There always is a primary goal that the researcher is trying to achieve through a report. In the introduction section, he/she can cover answers related to this goal and establish a thesis which will be included to strive and answer it in detail.  This section should answer an integral question: “What is the current situation of the goal?”.  After the research design was conducted, did the organization conclude the goal successfully or they are still a work in progress –  provide such details in the introduction part of the research report.
• Research Methodology: This is the most important section of the report where all the important information lies. The readers can gain data for the topic along with analyzing the quality of provided content and the research can also be approved by other market researchers . Thus, this section needs to be highly informative with each aspect of research discussed in detail.  Information needs to be expressed in chronological order according to its priority and importance. Researchers should include references in case they gained information from existing techniques.
• Research Results: A short description of the results along with calculations conducted to achieve the goal will form this section of results. Usually, the exposition after data analysis is carried out in the discussion part of the report.

Learn more: Quantitative Data

• Research Discussion: The results are discussed in extreme detail in this section along with a comparative analysis of reports that could probably exist in the same domain. Any abnormality uncovered during research will be deliberated in the discussion section.  While writing research reports, the researcher will have to connect the dots on how the results will be applicable in the real world.
• Research References and Conclusion: Conclude all the research findings along with mentioning each and every author, article or any content piece from where references were taken.

Learn more: Qualitative Observation

15 Tips for Writing Research Reports

Writing research reports in the manner can lead to all the efforts going down the drain. Here are 15 tips for writing impactful research reports:

• Prepare the context before starting to write and start from the basics:  This was always taught to us in school – be well-prepared before taking a plunge into new topics. The order of survey questions might not be the ideal or most effective order for writing research reports. The idea is to start with a broader topic and work towards a more specific one and focus on a conclusion or support, which a research should support with the facts.  The most difficult thing to do in reporting, without a doubt is to start. Start with the title, the introduction, then document the first discoveries and continue from that. Once the marketers have the information well documented, they can write a general conclusion.
• Keep the target audience in mind while selecting a format that is clear, logical and obvious to them:  Will the research reports be presented to decision makers or other researchers? What are the general perceptions around that topic? This requires more care and diligence. A researcher will need a significant amount of information to start writing the research report. Be consistent with the wording, the numbering of the annexes and so on. Follow the approved format of the company for the delivery of research reports and demonstrate the integrity of the project with the objectives of the company.
• Have a clear research objective: A researcher should read the entire proposal again, and make sure that the data they provide contributes to the objectives that were raised from the beginning. Remember that speculations are for conversations, not for research reports, if a researcher speculates, they directly question their own research.
• Establish a working model:  Each study must have an internal logic, which will have to be established in the report and in the evidence. The researchers’ worst nightmare is to be required to write research reports and realize that key questions were not included.

Learn more: Quantitative Observation

• Gather all the information about the research topic. Who are the competitors of our customers? Talk to other researchers who have studied the subject of research, know the language of the industry. Misuse of the terms can discourage the readers of research reports from reading further.
• Read aloud while writing. While reading the report, if the researcher hears something inappropriate, for example, if they stumble over the words when reading them, surely the reader will too. If the researcher can’t put an idea in a single sentence, then it is very long and they must change it so that the idea is clear to everyone.
• Check grammar and spelling. Without a doubt, good practices help to understand the report. Use verbs in the present tense. Consider using the present tense, which makes the results sound more immediate. Find new words and other ways of saying things. Have fun with the language whenever possible.
• Discuss only the discoveries that are significant. If some data are not really significant, do not mention them. Remember that not everything is truly important or essential within research reports.

Learn more: Qualitative Data

• Try and stick to the survey questions. For example, do not say that the people surveyed “were worried” about an research issue , when there are different degrees of concern.
• The graphs must be clear enough so that they understand themselves. Do not let graphs lead the reader to make mistakes: give them a title, include the indications, the size of the sample, and the correct wording of the question.
• Be clear with messages. A researcher should always write every section of the report with an accuracy of details and language.
• Be creative with titles – Particularly in segmentation studies choose names “that give life to research”. Such names can survive for a long time after the initial investigation.
• Create an effective conclusion: The conclusion in the research reports is the most difficult to write, but it is an incredible opportunity to excel. Make a precise summary. Sometimes it helps to start the conclusion with something specific, then it describes the most important part of the study, and finally, it provides the implications of the conclusions.
• Get a couple more pair of eyes to read the report. Writers have trouble detecting their own mistakes. But they are responsible for what is presented. Ensure it has been approved by colleagues or friends before sending the find draft out.

Learn more: Market Research and Analysis

MORE LIKE THIS

The Power of AI in Customer Experience — Tuesday CX Thoughts

Apr 16, 2024

Employee Lifecycle Management Software: Top of 2024

Apr 15, 2024

Top 15 Sentiment Analysis Software That Should Be on Your List

Top 13 A/B Testing Software for Optimizing Your Website

Apr 12, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Paper

Definition:

Research Paper is a written document that presents the author’s original research, analysis, and interpretation of a specific topic or issue.

It is typically based on Empirical Evidence, and may involve qualitative or quantitative research methods, or a combination of both. The purpose of a research paper is to contribute new knowledge or insights to a particular field of study, and to demonstrate the author’s understanding of the existing literature and theories related to the topic.

Structure of Research Paper

The structure of a research paper typically follows a standard format, consisting of several sections that convey specific information about the research study. The following is a detailed explanation of the structure of a research paper:

The title page contains the title of the paper, the name(s) of the author(s), and the affiliation(s) of the author(s). It also includes the date of submission and possibly, the name of the journal or conference where the paper is to be published.

The abstract is a brief summary of the research paper, typically ranging from 100 to 250 words. It should include the research question, the methods used, the key findings, and the implications of the results. The abstract should be written in a concise and clear manner to allow readers to quickly grasp the essence of the research.

Introduction

The introduction section of a research paper provides background information about the research problem, the research question, and the research objectives. It also outlines the significance of the research, the research gap that it aims to fill, and the approach taken to address the research question. Finally, the introduction section ends with a clear statement of the research hypothesis or research question.

Literature Review

The literature review section of a research paper provides an overview of the existing literature on the topic of study. It includes a critical analysis and synthesis of the literature, highlighting the key concepts, themes, and debates. The literature review should also demonstrate the research gap and how the current study seeks to address it.

The methods section of a research paper describes the research design, the sample selection, the data collection and analysis procedures, and the statistical methods used to analyze the data. This section should provide sufficient detail for other researchers to replicate the study.

The results section presents the findings of the research, using tables, graphs, and figures to illustrate the data. The findings should be presented in a clear and concise manner, with reference to the research question and hypothesis.

The discussion section of a research paper interprets the findings and discusses their implications for the research question, the literature review, and the field of study. It should also address the limitations of the study and suggest future research directions.

The conclusion section summarizes the main findings of the study, restates the research question and hypothesis, and provides a final reflection on the significance of the research.

The references section provides a list of all the sources cited in the paper, following a specific citation style such as APA, MLA or Chicago.

How to Write Research Paper

You can write Research Paper by the following guide:

• Choose a Topic: The first step is to select a topic that interests you and is relevant to your field of study. Brainstorm ideas and narrow down to a research question that is specific and researchable.
• Conduct a Literature Review: The literature review helps you identify the gap in the existing research and provides a basis for your research question. It also helps you to develop a theoretical framework and research hypothesis.
• Develop a Thesis Statement : The thesis statement is the main argument of your research paper. It should be clear, concise and specific to your research question.
• Plan your Research: Develop a research plan that outlines the methods, data sources, and data analysis procedures. This will help you to collect and analyze data effectively.
• Collect and Analyze Data: Collect data using various methods such as surveys, interviews, observations, or experiments. Analyze data using statistical tools or other qualitative methods.
• Organize your Paper : Organize your paper into sections such as Introduction, Literature Review, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion. Ensure that each section is coherent and follows a logical flow.
• Write your Paper : Start by writing the introduction, followed by the literature review, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Ensure that your writing is clear, concise, and follows the required formatting and citation styles.
• Edit and Proofread your Paper: Review your paper for grammar and spelling errors, and ensure that it is well-structured and easy to read. Ask someone else to review your paper to get feedback and suggestions for improvement.
• Cite your Sources: Ensure that you properly cite all sources used in your research paper. This is essential for giving credit to the original authors and avoiding plagiarism.

Research Paper Example

Note : The below example research paper is for illustrative purposes only and is not an actual research paper. Actual research papers may have different structures, contents, and formats depending on the field of study, research question, data collection and analysis methods, and other factors. Students should always consult with their professors or supervisors for specific guidelines and expectations for their research papers.

Research Paper Example sample for Students:

Title: The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health among Young Adults

Abstract: This study aims to investigate the impact of social media use on the mental health of young adults. A literature review was conducted to examine the existing research on the topic. A survey was then administered to 200 university students to collect data on their social media use, mental health status, and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. The results showed that social media use is positively associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. The study also found that social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) are significant predictors of mental health problems among young adults.

Introduction: Social media has become an integral part of modern life, particularly among young adults. While social media has many benefits, including increased communication and social connectivity, it has also been associated with negative outcomes, such as addiction, cyberbullying, and mental health problems. This study aims to investigate the impact of social media use on the mental health of young adults.

Literature Review: The literature review highlights the existing research on the impact of social media use on mental health. The review shows that social media use is associated with depression, anxiety, stress, and other mental health problems. The review also identifies the factors that contribute to the negative impact of social media, including social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO.

Methods : A survey was administered to 200 university students to collect data on their social media use, mental health status, and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. The survey included questions on social media use, mental health status (measured using the DASS-21), and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression analysis.

Results : The results showed that social media use is positively associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. The study also found that social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO are significant predictors of mental health problems among young adults.

Discussion : The study’s findings suggest that social media use has a negative impact on the mental health of young adults. The study highlights the need for interventions that address the factors contributing to the negative impact of social media, such as social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO.

Conclusion : In conclusion, social media use has a significant impact on the mental health of young adults. The study’s findings underscore the need for interventions that promote healthy social media use and address the negative outcomes associated with social media use. Future research can explore the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing the negative impact of social media on mental health. Additionally, longitudinal studies can investigate the long-term effects of social media use on mental health.

Limitations : The study has some limitations, including the use of self-report measures and a cross-sectional design. The use of self-report measures may result in biased responses, and a cross-sectional design limits the ability to establish causality.

Implications: The study’s findings have implications for mental health professionals, educators, and policymakers. Mental health professionals can use the findings to develop interventions that address the negative impact of social media use on mental health. Educators can incorporate social media literacy into their curriculum to promote healthy social media use among young adults. Policymakers can use the findings to develop policies that protect young adults from the negative outcomes associated with social media use.

References :

• Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2019). Associations between screen time and lower psychological well-being among children and adolescents: Evidence from a population-based study. Preventive medicine reports, 15, 100918.
• Primack, B. A., Shensa, A., Escobar-Viera, C. G., Barrett, E. L., Sidani, J. E., Colditz, J. B., … & James, A. E. (2017). Use of multiple social media platforms and symptoms of depression and anxiety: A nationally-representative study among US young adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 1-9.
• Van der Meer, T. G., & Verhoeven, J. W. (2017). Social media and its impact on academic performance of students. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 383-398.

Appendix : The survey used in this study is provided below.

Social Media and Mental Health Survey

• How often do you use social media per day?
• Less than 30 minutes
• 30 minutes to 1 hour
• 1 to 2 hours
• 2 to 4 hours
• More than 4 hours
• Which social media platforms do you use?
• Others (Please specify)
• How often do you experience the following on social media?
• Social comparison (comparing yourself to others)
• Cyberbullying
• Fear of Missing Out (FOMO)
• Have you ever experienced any of the following mental health problems in the past month?
• Do you think social media use has a positive or negative impact on your mental health?
• Very positive
• Somewhat positive
• Somewhat negative
• Very negative
• In your opinion, which factors contribute to the negative impact of social media on mental health?
• Social comparison
• In your opinion, what interventions could be effective in reducing the negative impact of social media on mental health?
• Education on healthy social media use
• Counseling for mental health problems caused by social media
• Social media detox programs
• Regulation of social media use

Thank you for your participation!

Applications of Research Paper

Research papers have several applications in various fields, including:

• Advancing knowledge: Research papers contribute to the advancement of knowledge by generating new insights, theories, and findings that can inform future research and practice. They help to answer important questions, clarify existing knowledge, and identify areas that require further investigation.
• Informing policy: Research papers can inform policy decisions by providing evidence-based recommendations for policymakers. They can help to identify gaps in current policies, evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, and inform the development of new policies and regulations.
• Improving practice: Research papers can improve practice by providing evidence-based guidance for professionals in various fields, including medicine, education, business, and psychology. They can inform the development of best practices, guidelines, and standards of care that can improve outcomes for individuals and organizations.
• Educating students : Research papers are often used as teaching tools in universities and colleges to educate students about research methods, data analysis, and academic writing. They help students to develop critical thinking skills, research skills, and communication skills that are essential for success in many careers.
• Fostering collaboration: Research papers can foster collaboration among researchers, practitioners, and policymakers by providing a platform for sharing knowledge and ideas. They can facilitate interdisciplinary collaborations and partnerships that can lead to innovative solutions to complex problems.

When to Write Research Paper

Research papers are typically written when a person has completed a research project or when they have conducted a study and have obtained data or findings that they want to share with the academic or professional community. Research papers are usually written in academic settings, such as universities, but they can also be written in professional settings, such as research organizations, government agencies, or private companies.

Here are some common situations where a person might need to write a research paper:

• For academic purposes: Students in universities and colleges are often required to write research papers as part of their coursework, particularly in the social sciences, natural sciences, and humanities. Writing research papers helps students to develop research skills, critical thinking skills, and academic writing skills.
• For publication: Researchers often write research papers to publish their findings in academic journals or to present their work at academic conferences. Publishing research papers is an important way to disseminate research findings to the academic community and to establish oneself as an expert in a particular field.
• To inform policy or practice : Researchers may write research papers to inform policy decisions or to improve practice in various fields. Research findings can be used to inform the development of policies, guidelines, and best practices that can improve outcomes for individuals and organizations.
• To share new insights or ideas: Researchers may write research papers to share new insights or ideas with the academic or professional community. They may present new theories, propose new research methods, or challenge existing paradigms in their field.

Purpose of Research Paper

The purpose of a research paper is to present the results of a study or investigation in a clear, concise, and structured manner. Research papers are written to communicate new knowledge, ideas, or findings to a specific audience, such as researchers, scholars, practitioners, or policymakers. The primary purposes of a research paper are:

• To contribute to the body of knowledge : Research papers aim to add new knowledge or insights to a particular field or discipline. They do this by reporting the results of empirical studies, reviewing and synthesizing existing literature, proposing new theories, or providing new perspectives on a topic.
• To inform or persuade: Research papers are written to inform or persuade the reader about a particular issue, topic, or phenomenon. They present evidence and arguments to support their claims and seek to persuade the reader of the validity of their findings or recommendations.
• To advance the field: Research papers seek to advance the field or discipline by identifying gaps in knowledge, proposing new research questions or approaches, or challenging existing assumptions or paradigms. They aim to contribute to ongoing debates and discussions within a field and to stimulate further research and inquiry.
• To demonstrate research skills: Research papers demonstrate the author’s research skills, including their ability to design and conduct a study, collect and analyze data, and interpret and communicate findings. They also demonstrate the author’s ability to critically evaluate existing literature, synthesize information from multiple sources, and write in a clear and structured manner.

Characteristics of Research Paper

Research papers have several characteristics that distinguish them from other forms of academic or professional writing. Here are some common characteristics of research papers:

• Evidence-based: Research papers are based on empirical evidence, which is collected through rigorous research methods such as experiments, surveys, observations, or interviews. They rely on objective data and facts to support their claims and conclusions.
• Structured and organized: Research papers have a clear and logical structure, with sections such as introduction, literature review, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. They are organized in a way that helps the reader to follow the argument and understand the findings.
• Formal and objective: Research papers are written in a formal and objective tone, with an emphasis on clarity, precision, and accuracy. They avoid subjective language or personal opinions and instead rely on objective data and analysis to support their arguments.
• Citations and references: Research papers include citations and references to acknowledge the sources of information and ideas used in the paper. They use a specific citation style, such as APA, MLA, or Chicago, to ensure consistency and accuracy.
• Peer-reviewed: Research papers are often peer-reviewed, which means they are evaluated by other experts in the field before they are published. Peer-review ensures that the research is of high quality, meets ethical standards, and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field.
• Objective and unbiased: Research papers strive to be objective and unbiased in their presentation of the findings. They avoid personal biases or preconceptions and instead rely on the data and analysis to draw conclusions.

Advantages of Research Paper

Research papers have many advantages, both for the individual researcher and for the broader academic and professional community. Here are some advantages of research papers:

• Contribution to knowledge: Research papers contribute to the body of knowledge in a particular field or discipline. They add new information, insights, and perspectives to existing literature and help advance the understanding of a particular phenomenon or issue.
• Opportunity for intellectual growth: Research papers provide an opportunity for intellectual growth for the researcher. They require critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity, which can help develop the researcher’s skills and knowledge.
• Career advancement: Research papers can help advance the researcher’s career by demonstrating their expertise and contributions to the field. They can also lead to new research opportunities, collaborations, and funding.
• Academic recognition: Research papers can lead to academic recognition in the form of awards, grants, or invitations to speak at conferences or events. They can also contribute to the researcher’s reputation and standing in the field.
• Impact on policy and practice: Research papers can have a significant impact on policy and practice. They can inform policy decisions, guide practice, and lead to changes in laws, regulations, or procedures.
• Advancement of society: Research papers can contribute to the advancement of society by addressing important issues, identifying solutions to problems, and promoting social justice and equality.

Limitations of Research Paper

Research papers also have some limitations that should be considered when interpreting their findings or implications. Here are some common limitations of research papers:

• Limited generalizability: Research findings may not be generalizable to other populations, settings, or contexts. Studies often use specific samples or conditions that may not reflect the broader population or real-world situations.
• Potential for bias : Research papers may be biased due to factors such as sample selection, measurement errors, or researcher biases. It is important to evaluate the quality of the research design and methods used to ensure that the findings are valid and reliable.
• Ethical concerns: Research papers may raise ethical concerns, such as the use of vulnerable populations or invasive procedures. Researchers must adhere to ethical guidelines and obtain informed consent from participants to ensure that the research is conducted in a responsible and respectful manner.
• Limitations of methodology: Research papers may be limited by the methodology used to collect and analyze data. For example, certain research methods may not capture the complexity or nuance of a particular phenomenon, or may not be appropriate for certain research questions.
• Publication bias: Research papers may be subject to publication bias, where positive or significant findings are more likely to be published than negative or non-significant findings. This can skew the overall findings of a particular area of research.
• Time and resource constraints: Research papers may be limited by time and resource constraints, which can affect the quality and scope of the research. Researchers may not have access to certain data or resources, or may be unable to conduct long-term studies due to practical limitations.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

How to Write Effective Research Reports

Frankline kibuacha | dec. 02, 2022 | 3 min. read.

A research report is a document that summarizes and provides an analysis of the findings of a research project. It is an important document that serves as a first-hand account of the research process, data, and findings of a research study, and it is typically considered an objective and accurate source of information.

There are a few questions a research report should answer:

• What are you researching?
• What is the goal of your research?
• What are your methods for researching?
• What did you find in your research?
• How does this compare to other findings?
• And what is the impact of this finding on the world?

A research report is normally organized into three broad sections. First, an introduction provides a brief background on the topic and introduces the reader to your perspective. The second section is the body of the report, which should include the research findings and supporting evidence. Finally, the conclusion, which summarizes your arguments and the implications of your study for future research.

Every year, GeoPoll carries out hundreds of research studies and produces reports on several topics, both for clients and internally commissioned studies. In this article, we highlight some tips for writing great reports from our experience.

Tips for writing excellent research reports

• Start from the basics – with an outline – It is a good idea to outline the research context and findings before taking the plunge, as it helps with the flow and structure of the research report. Once you have the broader information well documented, filling the gaps with the content and findings becomes more straightforward and sets the tone for the report.
• Consider the target audience – To guide the report, always keep the target audience in mind and then select a format that is clear, logical and obvious to the audience. A report meant for top decision-makers, for example, could be more concise than one meant for other researchers. Writing for the audience ensures that the research findings help the cause, so consider writing in their language to make it easy to understand at their level.
• Answer the research questions – Every effective research starts with a clear objective. In writing the report, make sure that the data provided contribute to the goal, which is, in reality, the real purpose for conducting the research in the first place.
• Be simple and clear – Research reports need not be complicated. Aim to write the report with an accuracy of details and language that is simplest and clearest to the reader. Use clear titles that clearly describe the following section in a way that readers will want to get into.
• Provide the methodology implemented – Researchers should also include a summary of the methods used to conduct the research, which provides the overall approaches and perspectives of the research process. The methodology details aspects such as the research objectives, the sample used , broken down into demographics such as gender, location, age, and other sample characteristics, data collection modes used, and data analysis methods. Sharing your methodology gives legitimacy to your research.
• Choose graphs correctly – Research reports often feature graphs to bring out data clearly. To fulfill this purpose, the graphs you use in your report must be clear enough so that the readers understand them themselves. Use clear titles, try and include the original question, and choose the best chart types to represent the data.
• Remain relevant – Not everything is genuinely essential to a research report, and you should aim at prioritizing only the significant discoveries. The idea of a research report is to present an abridged yet impactful version of your research, and it’s OK to exclude irrelevant information while highlighting only essential data and findings.
• Grammar and spelling are imperative – Even more important than most writings, research reports need to be written following the best language practices to help to understand the report and not unconsciously water down the seriousness of the information. Read aloud while writing to put yourself in the shoes of the reader. Use grammar and spell-checking tools and engage other people to proofread the report to ensure it reads well for the target audience.
• Choose an impactful title – A good research report title is brief, precise, and provides a clear idea of the underlying research so that readers can grasp the entire focus of your research from the title.
• Shoot for a strong conclusion – The conclusion in the research reports is primarily important because it summarizes the information and recommendations, and often, some readers skim through to the conclusion. Make a precise summary, highlight the findings that stand out, and provide the implications or courses of action derived from the research findings.

Read Free GeoPoll Reports

GeoPoll conducts research worldwide on topics integral to the organizations we serve and the world. You can read and download our reports here for free. Sign up for our newsletter to receive GeoPoll reports as soon as we release them.

Contact us about your upcoming research project and learn how we can help.

Related Posts

How to Write and Design Effective Surveys

Who Owns the Media in Ghana; A Research Project

How to Run B2B Market Research Surveys

Reporting Guidelines

It is important that your manuscript gives a clear and complete account of the research that you have done. Well reported research is more useful and complete reporting allows editors, peer reviewers and readers to understand what you did and how.

Poorly reported research can distort the literature, and leads to research that cannot be replicated or used in future meta-analyses or systematic reviews.

You should make sure that you manuscript is written in a way that the reader knows exactly what you did and could repeat your study if they wanted to with no additional information. It is particularly important that you give enough information in the methods section of your manuscript.

To help with reporting your research, there are reporting guidelines available for many different study designs. These contain a checklist of minimum points that you should cover in your manuscript. You should use these guidelines when you are preparing and writing your manuscript, and you may be required to provide a completed version of the checklist when you submit your manuscript. 

The EQUATOR (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency Of health Research) Network is an international initiative that aims to improve the quality of research publications. It provides a comprehensive list of reporting guidelines and other material to help improve reporting. 

A list full of all of the reporting guidelines endorsed by the EQUATOR Network can be found here . Some of the reporting guidelines for common study designs are:

• Randomized controlled trials – CONSORT
• Systematic reviews – PRISMA
• Observational studies – STROBE
• Case reports – CARE
• Qualitative research – COREQ
• Pre-clinical animal studies – ARRIVE

Peer reviewers may be asked to use these checklists when assessing your manuscript. If you follow these guidelines, editors and peer reviewers will be able to assess your manuscript better as they will more easily understand what you did. It may also mean that they ask you for fewer revisions.

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

In Spring 2021, the National Library of Medicine (NLM) PubMed® Special Query on this page will no longer be curated by NLM. If you have questions, please contact NLM Customer Support at https://support.nlm.nih.gov/

This chart lists the major biomedical research reporting guidelines that provide advice for reporting research methods and findings. They usually "specify a minimum set of items required for a clear and transparent account of what was done and what was found in a research study, reflecting, in particular, issues that might introduce bias into the research" (Adapted from the EQUATOR Network Resource Centre ). The chart also includes editorial style guides for writing research reports or other publications.

See the details of the search strategy. More research reporting guidelines are at the EQUATOR Network Resource Centre .

Last Reviewed: April 14, 2023

Citation and Writing Guides: Researchers & Postdocs

• Writing Basics: Grammar, Misspelling, & Punctuation
• Researchers & Postdocs
• APA Citation Style
• What is Fair Use & Copyright
• Research Paper Guides
• EndNote & Zotaro This link opens in a new window
• Search Guide This link opens in a new window
• Other Citation Resources
• << Previous: Writing Basics: Grammar, Misspelling, & Punctuation
• Next: APA Citation Style >>
• Last Updated: Apr 16, 2024 10:39 AM
• URL: https://cdrewu.libguides.com/write

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

GUIDELINES FOR WRITING RESEARCH REPORTS.

Nowadays many University students in Tanzania are facing challenges in writing their research reports, be it in government or private Universities. Specifically, students encounter problems in writing and formulating background of the study, statement of the problem, study objectives, literature review and research methodology. Their failure in these preceding chapters, leads to failure in data analysis and presentation, hence shortfalls in discussion and conclusion chapters. Methodologically, the article reviewed some scholarly studies conducted in Tanzania to substantiate the problem and indicate examples on how best the research reports can be written. Apart from narrations given, the article indicates examples with the aim of helping both junior and senior researchers to organize well their research reports in a manner of aligning ideas and chapters within the report. The article will as well help both undergraduate and postgraduate students whose programmes require researches in fulfillment of the requirement, for the award of their particular degrees.

Related Papers

Vidyodaya Journal of Management

N.J. Dewasiri

Scholarly or academic writing is clear, concise, planned, coherent, and backed up by evidence. Its purpose is to aid the reader’s understanding. Hence, it consists of a formal style and tone. Further, it does not require the use of long sentences and instead uses clear and concise language with simple vocabulary. Research report writing is an integral part of academic writing. Hence, both academic and research report writing play a vital role in developing a multitude of researchers across the globe. The authors of the book entitled “A Guide to Academic Writing and Research Reports” identified such a role to develop prolific researchers amongst the student community both within and outside the university in Sri Lanka.

VIDYA - A JOURNAL OF GUJARAT UNIVERSITY

Alpesh Prajapati

The paper is designed to acquaint the researchers about how to write a research report. The paper intends to discuss the common format of research report. There can be several reasons for writing a research report. It can be written for publishing in scholarly journals, peer-reviewed journals, publications and books. The paper will improve our understanding of writing a good academic research report with example of our research topics on various issues. The examples are based on our research on HIV positive people, adolescent health and infertility issues. The primary source of data collection for the paper is our field work.

International Journal of Research Studies in Education

Sotco Claudius Komba

Zimbabwe Journal of Educational Research

morrin phiri

Stevejobs.education

Dr. David Annan

Very often, little attention is paid to how students have to prepare and understand the processes of conducting research and mostly young scholars struggle in the early stages in the university career about what is required of them and how to present their proposal to their supervisors. Keeping this in mind, the purpose of this guidebook is to offer a critical and practical mind map introduction to research writing to assist researchers in creating an appropriate design for their research studies and to offer the simplest guide of creating a logical orientated research. The book is made using simple graphs to explain what is expected of researchers at each stage of their research writing to enable them to understand if any a missing link when conducting their research. The book is mostly content mind-map and figures to make it easier for the researcher to understand what is expected of them from the stages of their research to completion. It presents the basic tenets of methodological steps so that the researcher can become familiar with how to conduct research and what techniques to use in their choice for research writing.

Ibadan University Press eBooks

Emeka Emmanuel OKAFOR

Michael Evans

Roczniki Kulturoznawcze

Anuradha Iddagoda

Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series

Joseph Ssenyonga

RELATED PAPERS

The International Trade Journal

Cynthia Rogers

Jurnal Agroqua: Media Informasi Agronomi dan Budidaya Perairan

herman tubur

Revista Instituto Florestal, …

Elaine Fidalgo

Steven D'Alessandro

Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia

Valter Furlan

Revue des Maladies Respiratoires

anviet house

Aging Clinical and Experimental Research

Umberto Tarantino

Steffen Fries

Luciano de Azambuja

Science of The Total Environment

Laila Rhazi

Corrada Geraci

Bangladesh Journal of Anatomy

Kanij Fatema

The Astrophysical Journal

Hans-walter Rix

Azlinun Muhamad

JOURNAL OF AFRICAN REAL ESTATE RESEARCH

John J Mushi

PoliÉtica. Reviste de Ética e Filosofía Política

Kamal Cumsille

Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne

Ewa Danowska

Geosciences

Gemma Aiello

Journal of Burn Care & Research

Emily Werthman

Computers & Structures

jhkghjf hfdgedfg

Erika Winagraski

Guna Widya: Jurnal Pendidikan Hindu

Ayu Putu Dewi Ary Sukanti

Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan : JCPSP

Omer Elfaki

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

How to Create a Structured Research Paper Outline | Example

Published on August 7, 2022 by Courtney Gahan . Revised on August 15, 2023.

A research paper outline is a useful tool to aid in the writing process , providing a structure to follow with all information to be included in the paper clearly organized.

A quality outline can make writing your research paper more efficient by helping to:

• Organize your thoughts
• Understand the flow of information and how ideas are related
• Ensure nothing is forgotten

A research paper outline can also give your teacher an early idea of the final product.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Research paper outline example, how to write a research paper outline, formatting your research paper outline, language in research paper outlines.

• Definition of measles
• Rise in cases in recent years in places the disease was previously eliminated or had very low rates of infection
• Figures: Number of cases per year on average, number in recent years. Relate to immunization
• Symptoms and timeframes of disease
• Risk of fatality, including statistics
• How measles is spread
• Immunization procedures in different regions
• Different regions, focusing on the arguments from those against immunization
• Immunization figures in affected regions
• High number of cases in non-immunizing regions
• Illnesses that can result from measles virus
• Fatal cases of other illnesses after patient contracted measles
• Summary of arguments of different groups
• Summary of figures and relationship with recent immunization debate
• Which side of the argument appears to be correct?

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Follow these steps to start your research paper outline:

• Decide on the subject of the paper
• Write down all the ideas you want to include or discuss
• Organize related ideas into sub-groups
• Arrange your ideas into a hierarchy: What should the reader learn first? What is most important? Which idea will help end your paper most effectively?
• Create headings and subheadings that are effective
• Format the outline in either alphanumeric, full-sentence or decimal format

There are three different kinds of research paper outline: alphanumeric, full-sentence and decimal outlines. The differences relate to formatting and style of writing.

• Alphanumeric
• Full-sentence

An alphanumeric outline is most commonly used. It uses Roman numerals, capitalized letters, arabic numerals, lowercase letters to organize the flow of information. Text is written with short notes rather than full sentences.

• Sub-point of sub-point 1

Essentially the same as the alphanumeric outline, but with the text written in full sentences rather than short points.

• Additional sub-point to conclude discussion of point of evidence introduced in point A

A decimal outline is similar in format to the alphanumeric outline, but with a different numbering system: 1, 1.1, 1.2, etc. Text is written as short notes rather than full sentences.

• 1.1.1 Sub-point of first point
• 1.1.2 Sub-point of first point
• 1.2 Second point

To write an effective research paper outline, it is important to pay attention to language. This is especially important if it is one you will show to your teacher or be assessed on.

There are four main considerations: parallelism, coordination, subordination and division.

Parallelism: Be consistent with grammatical form

Parallel structure or parallelism is the repetition of a particular grammatical form within a sentence, or in this case, between points and sub-points. This simply means that if the first point is a verb , the sub-point should also be a verb.

Example of parallelism:

• Include different regions, focusing on the different arguments from those against immunization

Coordination: Be aware of each point’s weight

Your chosen subheadings should hold the same significance as each other, as should all first sub-points, secondary sub-points, and so on.

Example of coordination:

• Include immunization figures in affected regions
• Illnesses that can result from the measles virus

Subordination: Work from general to specific

Subordination refers to the separation of general points from specific. Your main headings should be quite general, and each level of sub-point should become more specific.

Example of subordination:

Division: break information into sub-points.

Your headings should be divided into two or more subsections. There is no limit to how many subsections you can include under each heading, but keep in mind that the information will be structured into a paragraph during the writing stage, so you should not go overboard with the number of sub-points.

Ready to start writing or looking for guidance on a different step in the process? Read our step-by-step guide on how to write a research paper .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Gahan, C. (2023, August 15). How to Create a Structured Research Paper Outline | Example. Scribbr. Retrieved April 15, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/outline/

Is this article helpful?

Courtney Gahan

Other students also liked, research paper format | apa, mla, & chicago templates, writing a research paper introduction | step-by-step guide, writing a research paper conclusion | step-by-step guide, what is your plagiarism score.

AI Index Report

Welcome to the seventh edition of the AI Index report. The 2024 Index is our most comprehensive to date and arrives at an important moment when AI’s influence on society has never been more pronounced. This year, we have broadened our scope to more extensively cover essential trends such as technical advancements in AI, public perceptions of the technology, and the geopolitical dynamics surrounding its development. Featuring more original data than ever before, this edition introduces new estimates on AI training costs, detailed analyses of the responsible AI landscape, and an entirely new chapter dedicated to AI’s impact on science and medicine.

Read the 2024 AI Index Report

The AI Index report tracks, collates, distills, and visualizes data related to artificial intelligence (AI). Our mission is to provide unbiased, rigorously vetted, broadly sourced data in order for policymakers, researchers, executives, journalists, and the general public to develop a more thorough and nuanced understanding of the complex field of AI.

The AI Index is recognized globally as one of the most credible and authoritative sources for data and insights on artificial intelligence. Previous editions have been cited in major newspapers, including the The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Guardian, have amassed hundreds of academic citations, and been referenced by high-level policymakers in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, among other places. This year’s edition surpasses all previous ones in size, scale, and scope, reflecting the growing significance that AI is coming to hold in all of our lives.

Steering Committee Co-Directors

Ray Perrault

Steering committee members.

Erik Brynjolfsson

John Etchemendy

Katrina Ligett

Terah Lyons

James Manyika

Juan Carlos Niebles

Vanessa Parli

Yoav Shoham

Russell Wald

Staff members.

Loredana Fattorini

Nestor Maslej

Letter from the co-directors.

A decade ago, the best AI systems in the world were unable to classify objects in images at a human level. AI struggled with language comprehension and could not solve math problems. Today, AI systems routinely exceed human performance on standard benchmarks.

Progress accelerated in 2023. New state-of-the-art systems like GPT-4, Gemini, and Claude 3 are impressively multimodal: They can generate fluent text in dozens of languages, process audio, and even explain memes. As AI has improved, it has increasingly forced its way into our lives. Companies are racing to build AI-based products, and AI is increasingly being used by the general public. But current AI technology still has significant problems. It cannot reliably deal with facts, perform complex reasoning, or explain its conclusions.

AI faces two interrelated futures. First, technology continues to improve and is increasingly used, having major consequences for productivity and employment. It can be put to both good and bad uses. In the second future, the adoption of AI is constrained by the limitations of the technology. Regardless of which future unfolds, governments are increasingly concerned. They are stepping in to encourage the upside, such as funding university R&D and incentivizing private investment. Governments are also aiming to manage the potential downsides, such as impacts on employment, privacy concerns, misinformation, and intellectual property rights.

As AI rapidly evolves, the AI Index aims to help the AI community, policymakers, business leaders, journalists, and the general public navigate this complex landscape. It provides ongoing, objective snapshots tracking several key areas: technical progress in AI capabilities, the community and investments driving AI development and deployment, public opinion on current and potential future impacts, and policy measures taken to stimulate AI innovation while managing its risks and challenges. By comprehensively monitoring the AI ecosystem, the Index serves as an important resource for understanding this transformative technological force.

On the technical front, this year’s AI Index reports that the number of new large language models released worldwide in 2023 doubled over the previous year. Two-thirds were open-source, but the highest-performing models came from industry players with closed systems. Gemini Ultra became the first LLM to reach human-level performance on the Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) benchmark; performance on the benchmark has improved by 15 percentage points since last year. Additionally, GPT-4 achieved an impressive 0.97 mean win rate score on the comprehensive Holistic Evaluation of Language Models (HELM) benchmark, which includes MMLU among other evaluations.

Although global private investment in AI decreased for the second consecutive year, investment in generative AI skyrocketed. More Fortune 500 earnings calls mentioned AI than ever before, and new studies show that AI tangibly boosts worker productivity. On the policymaking front, global mentions of AI in legislative proceedings have never been higher. U.S. regulators passed more AI-related regulations in 2023 than ever before. Still, many expressed concerns about AI’s ability to generate deepfakes and impact elections. The public became more aware of AI, and studies suggest that they responded with nervousness.

Ray Perrault Co-director, AI Index

Our Supporting Partners

Analytics & Research Partners

Stay up to date on the AI Index by subscribing to the  Stanford HAI newsletter.

Office of Science Policy

Biosafety and Biosecurity Policy

Life sciences research is essential to protecting global health security by helping us to understand the fundamental nature of human-pathogen interactions and informing public health and preparedness efforts, such as the development of vaccines and medical countermeasures. OSP develops policies to preserve the benefits of this research while minimizing its potential misuse.

• Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC)

Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens (ePPP)

• NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules (NIH Guidelines)

Links to Other Biosafety Resources

Faqs and fact sheets.

• IBC Administration
• Externally Administered IBCs
• IBC Meetings and Minutes

Incident Reporting

• Fact Sheet on OSP Review of Requests to Lower the Minimum Required Biosafety Containment Level for Research Subject to the NIH Guidelines
• Interim Laboratory Biosafety Guidance for Research with SARS-CoV-2 and IBC Requirements under the  NIH Guidelines
• Animal Experiments Under the NIH Guidelines
• Animal Activities Table
• Factsheet on Release of Client-Owned Animals After Participation in Research Subject to the NIH Guidelines
• Toxin Experiments
• Major Actions Under the  NIH Guidelines
• Lentiviral Containment Guidance
• Amendments to the NIH Guidelines  Regarding Research Involving Gene Drive Modified Organisms
• Biosafety Considerations for Contained Research Involving Gene Drive Modified Organisms
• April 2019 Amendment of the  NIH Guidelines

Dual Use Research of Concern

Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) is life sciences research that, based on current understanding, can be reasonably anticipated to provide knowledge, information, products, or technologies that could be directly misapplied to pose a significant threat with broad potential consequences to public health and safety, agricultural crops and other plants, animals, the environment, materiel, or national security. The United States Government’s oversight of DURC is aimed at preserving the benefits of life sciences research while minimizing the risk of misuse of the knowledge, information, products, or technologies provided by such research.

Watch the video “Dual Use Research: A Dialogue”

U.S. Government DURC Policies

• United States Government Policy for Oversight of Life Sciences Dual Use Research of Concern (March 2012)
• United States Government Policy for Institutional Oversight of Life Sciences Dual use Research of Concern (September 2014)
• Companion Guide to U.S. government policies for oversight of DURC

External Resources

S3: Science, Safety, and Security

The U.S. Government and the Department of Health and Human Services define enhanced potential pandemic pathogen (ePPP) research as research that may be reasonably anticipated to create, transfer or use potential pandemic pathogens resulting from the enhancement of a pathogen’s transmissibility and/or virulence in humans.

ePPP research can help us prepare for the next pandemic, for example by informing public health and preparedness efforts including surveillance and the development of vaccines and medical countermeasures. However, such research requires strict oversight and may only be conducted with appropriate biosafety and biosecurity measures.

The HHS  Framework for Guiding Funding Decisions about Proposed Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens (HHS P3CO Framework)  was established in 2017 to guide HHS funding decisions on proposed ePPP research and aims to preserve the benefits of life sciences research involving ePPPs while minimizing potential biosafety and biosecurity risks. The HHS P3CO Framework is responsive to and in accordance with the  Recommended Policy Guidance for Departmental Development of Review Mechanisms for Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and Oversight  issued by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy following a three-year, public deliberative process .

Department of Health and Human Services P3CO Framework

Department of Health and Human Services Framework for Guiding Funding Decisions about Proposed Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens

U.S. Government Policy on Enhanced PPP Research

Recommended Policy Guidance for Departmental Development of Review Mechanisms for Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and Oversight

Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and Oversight (P3CO) Policy Development

NSABB Recommendations for the Evaluation and Oversight of Proposed Gain-of-Function Research

U.S. Government Gain-of-Function Deliberative Process and Research Funding Pause on Selected Gain-of-Function Research Involving Influenza, MERS, and SARS Viruses

FAQs on the U.S. government Gain-of-function Deliberative Process and Research Funding Pause

Symposia Summaries and Commissioned Reports

1st National Academies Symposium Summary (December 15-16, 2014) – Potential Risks and Benefits of Gain-of-Function Research: Summary of a Workshop

2nd National Academies Symposium Summary (March 10-11, 2016) – Gain-of-Function Research: Summary of the Second Symposium

Risk and Benefit Analysis of Gain of Function Research – Final Report  (Gryphon Scientific)

Gain-of-Function Research: Ethical Analysis  (Professor Michael J. Selgelid)

Additional Material

NIH Director’s Statement on Funding Pause on Certain Types of Gain-of-Function Research

NIH Director’s Statement on Lifting of NIH Funding Pause on Gain-of-Function Research

NIH Director’s Statement on NIH’s commitment to transparency on research involving potential pandemic pathogens

Supplemental Information on the Risk and Benefit Analysis of Gain-of-Function Research

Gain-of-Function Deliberative Process Written Public Comments (Nov 10, 2014 – June 8, 2016)

NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules (NIH Guidelines )

• NIH Guidelines – April 2024 (PDF) (Printer friendly for duplex printing)
• Federal Register Notice – April 2024

The NIH Guidelines require that any significant problems, violations, or any significant research-related accidents and illnesses” be reported to OSP within 30 days. Appendix G of the NIH Guidelines specifies certain types of accidents that must be reported on a more expedited basis. Specifically, Appendix G-II-B-2-k requires that spills and accidents in BL2 laboratories resulting in an overt exposure must be immediately reported to the OSP (as well as the IBC). In addition, Appendices G-II-C-2-q and G-II-D-2-k require that spills or accidents occurring in high containment (BL3 or BL4) laboratories resulting in an overt or potential exposure must be immediately reported to OSP (as well as the IBC and BSO).

• Incident Reporting FAQs – December 2023
• Incident Reporting Template – April 2019

*Incident reports may be released to the public in full. Please note that incident reports should not include personally identifiable information or any information that you do not wish to make public. Proprietary, classified, confidential, or sensitive information should not be included in the report.  If it is necessary to include such information, please clearly mark it as such so that it can be considered for redaction in accordance with Freedom of Information Act exemptions.*

IBC RMS and Registration Information

• Institutional Biosafety Committee Registration Management System (IBC-RMS)

IBC Self-Assessment Tool

• IBC Self-Assessment Tool – April 2024

Investigator Brochure

• Investigator Responsibilities under the  NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules  – October 2021

Additional Resources

• CDC Biosafety Resources and Tools
• American Biological Safety Association (ABSA)
• AIHA Home Page
• American Society for Microbiology
• The American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy
• Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC) Website
• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Website
• The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
• The Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP)
• The Federal Register Website
• The Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare
• The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) Website
• Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories (BMBL)
• Risk Group Classification for Infectious Agents (ABSA)
• Select Agent Program
• Association for the Accreditation of Human Research Protection Programs
• Biosafety Discussion List

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Write down your thoughts and shred them to relieve anger, researchers say

Writing negative reactions on paper and shredding it or scrunching and throwing in the bin eliminates angry feelings, study finds

Since time immemorial humans have tried to devise anger management techniques.

In ancient Rome, the Stoic philosopher Seneca believed “my anger is likely to do me more harm than your wrong” and offered avoidance tips in his AD45 work De Ira (On Anger).

More modern methods include a workout on the gym punchbag or exercise bike. But the humble paper shredder may be a more effective – and accessible – way to decompress, according to research.

A study in Japan has found that writing down your reaction to a negative incident on a piece of paper and then shredding it, or scrunching it into a ball and throwing it in the bin, gets rid of anger.

“We expected that our method would suppress anger to some extent,” said Nobuyuki Kawai, lead researcher of the study at Nagoya University. “However, we were amazed that anger was eliminated almost entirely.”

The study, published in Scientific Reports on Nature , builds on research on the association between the written word and anger reduction as well as studies showing how interactions with physical objects can control a person’s mood. For instance, those wanting revenge on an ex-partner may burn letters or destroy gifts.

Researchers believe the shredder results may be related to the phenomenon of “backward magical contagion”, which is the belief that actions taken on an object associated with a person can affect the individuals themselves. In this case, getting rid of the negative physical entity, the piece of paper, causes the original emotion to also disappear.

This is a reversal of “magical contagion” or “celebrity contagion” – the belief that the “essence” of an individual can be transferred through their physical possessions.

Fifty student participants were asked to write brief opinions about an important social problem, such as whether smoking in public should be outlawed. Evaluators then deliberately scored the papers low on intelligence, interest, friendliness, logic, and rationality. For good measure, evaluators added insulting comments such as: “I cannot believe an educated person would think like this. I hope this person learns something while at the university.”

The wound-up participants then wrote down their angry thoughts on the negative feedback on a piece of paper. One group was told to either roll up the paper and throw it in a bin or keep it in a file on their desk. A second group was told to shred the paper, or put it in a plastic box.

Anger levels of the individuals who discarded their paper in the bin or shredded it returned to their initial state, while those who retained a hard copy of the paper experienced only a small decrease in their overall anger.

Researchers concluded that “the meaning (interpretation) of disposal plays a critical role” in reducing anger.

“This technique could be applied in the moment by writing down the source of anger as if taking a memo and then throwing it away,” said Kawai.

Along with its practical benefits, this discovery may shed light on the origins of the Japanese cultural tradition known as hakidashisara ( hakidashi sara refers to a dish or plate) at the Hiyoshi shrine in Kiyosu, just outside Nagoya. Hakidashisara is an annual festival where people smash small discs representing things that make them angry. The study’s findings may explain the feeling of relief that participants report after leaving the festival, the paper concluded.

More on this story

Fridge magnets can be cool aid to holiday memory recall, study finds

Want to skip that Christmas party? The host probably won’t mind, study shows

‘Succession syndrome’ prevalent among wealthy households, psychiatrists warn

Drugs and alcohol do not make you more creative, research finds

Why being rude to the waiter (or other staff) is the worst strategy

Authors of original dating profiles rated more attractive, research finds

I fear my children are overexposed to technology. Experts say I’m right to worry

I used to be ashamed of being a fangirl. Now I see how joyous and creative it was

Autistic scholar Temple Grandin: ‘The education system is screening out visual thinkers’

Human neurons transplanted into rats to help study brain disorders

Most viewed.

Read our research on: Gun Policy | International Conflict | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Political typology quiz.

Notice: Beginning April 18th community groups will be temporarily unavailable for extended maintenance. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Where do you fit in the political typology?

Are you a faith and flag conservative progressive left or somewhere in between.

Take our quiz to find out which one of our nine political typology groups is your best match, compared with a nationally representative survey of more than 10,000 U.S. adults by Pew Research Center. You may find some of these questions are difficult to answer. That’s OK. In those cases, pick the answer that comes closest to your view, even if it isn’t exactly right.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

What the trans care recommendations from the NHS England report mean

The report calls for more research on puberty blockers and hormone therapies.

A new report commissioned by the National Health Service England advocates for further research on gender-affirming care for transgender youth and young adults.

Dr. Hillary Cass, a former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, was appointed by NHS England and NHS Improvement to chair the Independent Review of Gender Identity Services in 2020 amid a rise in referrals to NHS' gender services. Upon review, she advises "extreme caution" for the use of hormone therapies.

"It is absolutely right that children and young people, who may be dealing with a complex range of issues around their gender identity, get the best possible support and expertise throughout their care," Cass states in the report.

Around 2022, about 5,000 adolescents and children were referred to the NHS' gender services. The report estimated that roughly 20% of children and young people seen by the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) enter a hormone pathway -- roughly 1,000 people under 18 in England.

Following four years of data analysis, Cass concluded that "while a considerable amount of research has been published in this field, systematic evidence reviews demonstrated the poor quality of the published studies, meaning there is not a reliable evidence base upon which to make clinical decisions, or for children and their families to make informed choices."

Cass continued: "The strengths and weaknesses of the evidence base on the care of children and young people are often misrepresented and overstated, both in scientific publications and social debate," read the report.

Among her recommendations, she urged the NHS to increase the available workforce in this field, to work on setting up more regional outlets for care, increase investment in research on this care, and improve the quality of care to meet international guidelines.

Cass' review comes as the NHS continues to expand its children and young people's gender identity services across the country. The NHS has recently opened new children and young people's gender services based in London and the Northwest.

NHS England, the country's universal healthcare system, said the report is expected to guide and shape its use of gender affirming care in children and potentially impact youth patients in England accessing gender-affirming care.

MORE: Lawsuit filed by families against Ohio trans care ban legislation

The debate over transgender youth care.

In an interview with The Guardian , Cass stated that her findings are not intended to undermine the validity of trans identities or challenge young people's right to transition but to improve the care they are receiving.

"We've let them down because the research isn't good enough and we haven't got good data," Cass told the news outlet. "The toxicity of the debate is perpetuated by adults, and that itself is unfair to the children who are caught in the middle of it. The children are being used as a football and this is a group that we should be showing more compassion to."

In the report, Cass argued that the knowledge and expertise of "experienced clinicians who have reached different conclusions about the best approach to care" has been "dismissed and invalidated" amid arguments concerning transgender care in youth.

Cass did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for comment.

Recommendations for trans youth care

Cass is calling for more thorough research that looks at the "characteristics, interventions and outcomes" of NHS gender service patients concerning puberty blockers and hormone therapy, particularly among children and adolescents.

The report's recommendations also urge caregivers to take an approach to care that considers young patients "holistically and not solely in terms of their gender-related distress."

The report notes that identity exploration is "a completely natural process during childhood and adolescence."

Related Stories

State sends bill to ban 1st-cousin marriages

• Apr 11, 5:37 PM

Ukrainian president signs controversial law to boost conscription to fend off Russia's aggression

• Apr 16, 10:42 AM

Soldiers desert Putin's war but no hero’s welcome

• Apr 12, 2:07 AM

Cass recommends that pre-pubertal children and their families have early discussions about how parents can best support their child "in a balanced and non-judgemental way," which may include "psychological and psychopharmacological treatments" to manage distress associated with gender incongruence and co-occurring conditions.

In past interviews, U.S. physicians told ABC News , that patients, their physicians and their families often engage in a lengthy process of building a customized and individualized approach to care, meaning not every patient will receive any or every type of gender-affirming medical care option.

Cass' report states that evidence particularly for puberty blockers in children and adolescents is "weak" regarding the impact on "gender dysphoria, mental or psychosocial health. The effect on cognitive and psychosexual development remains unknown."

The NHS has said it will halt routine use of puberty blockers as it prepares for a study into the practice later this year.

MORE: Amid anti-LGBTQ efforts, transgender community finds joy in 'chosen families'

According to the Endocrine Society puberty blockers, as opposed to hormone therapy, temporarily pause puberty so patients have more time to explore their gender identity.

The report also recommends "extreme caution" for transgender youth from age 16 who take more permanent hormone therapies.

"There should be a clear clinical rationale for providing hormones at this stage rather than waiting until an individual reaches 18," the report's recommendations state.

Hormone therapy, according to the Endocrine Society , triggers physical changes like hair growth, muscle development, body fat and more, that can help better align the body with a person's gender identity. It's not unusual for patients to stop hormone therapy and decide that they have transitioned as far as they wish, physicians have told ABC News.

Cass' report asserts that there are many unknowns about the use of both puberty blockers and hormones for minors, "despite their longstanding use in the adult transgender population."

"The lack of long-term follow-up data on those commencing treatment at an earlier age means we have inadequate information about the range of outcomes for this group," the report states.

Cass recommends that NHS England facilities have procedures in place to follow up with 17 to 25-year-old patients "to ensure continuity of care and support at a potentially vulnerable stage in their journey," as well as allow for further data and research on transgender minors through the years.

Several British medical organizations, including British Psychological Society and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, commended the report's recommendations to expand the workforce and invest in further research to allow young people to make better informed decisions.

“Dr Cass and her team have produced a thought-provoking, detailed and wide-ranging list of recommendations, which will have implications for all professionals working with gender-questioning children and young people," said Dr Roman Raczka, of the British Psychological Society. "It will take time to carefully review and respond to the whole report, but I am sure that psychology, as a profession, will reflect and learn lessons from the review, its findings and recommendations."

Some groups expressed fears that the report will be misused by anti-transgender groups.

"All children have the right to access specialist effective care on time and must be afforded the privacy to make decisions that are appropriate for them in consultation with a specialist," said human rights group Amnesty International. "This review is being weaponised by people who revel in spreading disinformation and myths about healthcare for trans young people."

Transgender care for people under 18 has been a source of contention in both the United States and the United Kingdom. Legislation is being pushed across the U.S. by many Republican legislators focused on banning all medical care options like puberty blockers and hormone therapies for minors. Some argue that gender-affirming care is unsafe for youth, or that they should wait until they're older.

Gender-affirming medical does come with risks, according to the Endocrine Society , including impacts to bone mineral density, cholesterol levels, and blood clot risks. However, physicians have told ABC News that all medications, surgeries or vaccines come with some kind of risk.

Major national medical associations in the U.S., including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and more than 20 others have argued that gender-affirming care is safe, effective, beneficial, and medically necessary.

The first-of-its-kind gender care clinic at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Maryland opened in the 1960s, using similar procedures still used today.

Some studies have shown that some gender-affirming options can have positive impacts on the mental health of transgender patients, who may experience gender-related stress.

Related Topics

• United Kingdom

Belgian police shut down a far-right conference as it rallies ahead of Europe's June elections

• Apr 16, 11:58 AM

Supreme Court allows Idaho to enforce its ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth, reversing lower courts

• Apr 15, 5:10 PM

ABC News Live

24/7 coverage of breaking news and live events