how to write a procedure for research

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 6. The Methodology
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

The methods section describes actions taken to investigate a research problem and the rationale for the application of specific procedures or techniques used to identify, select, process, and analyze information applied to understanding the problem, thereby, allowing the reader to critically evaluate a study’s overall validity and reliability. The methodology section of a research paper answers two main questions: How was the data collected or generated? And, how was it analyzed? The writing should be direct and precise and always written in the past tense.

Kallet, Richard H. "How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper." Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004): 1229-1232.

Importance of a Good Methodology Section

You must explain how you obtained and analyzed your results for the following reasons:

• Readers need to know how the data was obtained because the method you chose affects the results and, by extension, how you interpreted their significance in the discussion section of your paper.
• Methodology is crucial for any branch of scholarship because an unreliable method produces unreliable results and, as a consequence, undermines the value of your analysis of the findings.
• In most cases, there are a variety of different methods you can choose to investigate a research problem. The methodology section of your paper should clearly articulate the reasons why you have chosen a particular procedure or technique.
• The reader wants to know that the data was collected or generated in a way that is consistent with accepted practice in the field of study. For example, if you are using a multiple choice questionnaire, readers need to know that it offered your respondents a reasonable range of answers to choose from.
• The method must be appropriate to fulfilling the overall aims of the study. For example, you need to ensure that you have a large enough sample size to be able to generalize and make recommendations based upon the findings.
• The methodology should discuss the problems that were anticipated and the steps you took to prevent them from occurring. For any problems that do arise, you must describe the ways in which they were minimized or why these problems do not impact in any meaningful way your interpretation of the findings.
• In the social and behavioral sciences, it is important to always provide sufficient information to allow other researchers to adopt or replicate your methodology. This information is particularly important when a new method has been developed or an innovative use of an existing method is utilized.

Bem, Daryl J. Writing the Empirical Journal Article. Psychology Writing Center. University of Washington; Denscombe, Martyn. The Good Research Guide: For Small-Scale Social Research Projects . 5th edition. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press, 2014; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Groups of Research Methods

There are two main groups of research methods in the social sciences:

• The e mpirical-analytical group approaches the study of social sciences in a similar manner that researchers study the natural sciences . This type of research focuses on objective knowledge, research questions that can be answered yes or no, and operational definitions of variables to be measured. The empirical-analytical group employs deductive reasoning that uses existing theory as a foundation for formulating hypotheses that need to be tested. This approach is focused on explanation.
• The i nterpretative group of methods is focused on understanding phenomenon in a comprehensive, holistic way . Interpretive methods focus on analytically disclosing the meaning-making practices of human subjects [the why, how, or by what means people do what they do], while showing how those practices arrange so that it can be used to generate observable outcomes. Interpretive methods allow you to recognize your connection to the phenomena under investigation. However, the interpretative group requires careful examination of variables because it focuses more on subjective knowledge.

II.  Content

The introduction to your methodology section should begin by restating the research problem and underlying assumptions underpinning your study. This is followed by situating the methods you used to gather, analyze, and process information within the overall “tradition” of your field of study and within the particular research design you have chosen to study the problem. If the method you choose lies outside of the tradition of your field [i.e., your review of the literature demonstrates that the method is not commonly used], provide a justification for how your choice of methods specifically addresses the research problem in ways that have not been utilized in prior studies.

The remainder of your methodology section should describe the following:

• Decisions made in selecting the data you have analyzed or, in the case of qualitative research, the subjects and research setting you have examined,
• Tools and methods used to identify and collect information, and how you identified relevant variables,
• The ways in which you processed the data and the procedures you used to analyze that data, and
• The specific research tools or strategies that you utilized to study the underlying hypothesis and research questions.

In addition, an effectively written methodology section should:

• Introduce the overall methodological approach for investigating your research problem . Is your study qualitative or quantitative or a combination of both (mixed method)? Are you going to take a special approach, such as action research, or a more neutral stance?
• Indicate how the approach fits the overall research design . Your methods for gathering data should have a clear connection to your research problem. In other words, make sure that your methods will actually address the problem. One of the most common deficiencies found in research papers is that the proposed methodology is not suitable to achieving the stated objective of your paper.
• Describe the specific methods of data collection you are going to use , such as, surveys, interviews, questionnaires, observation, archival research. If you are analyzing existing data, such as a data set or archival documents, describe how it was originally created or gathered and by whom. Also be sure to explain how older data is still relevant to investigating the current research problem.
• Explain how you intend to analyze your results . Will you use statistical analysis? Will you use specific theoretical perspectives to help you analyze a text or explain observed behaviors? Describe how you plan to obtain an accurate assessment of relationships, patterns, trends, distributions, and possible contradictions found in the data.
• Provide background and a rationale for methodologies that are unfamiliar for your readers . Very often in the social sciences, research problems and the methods for investigating them require more explanation/rationale than widely accepted rules governing the natural and physical sciences. Be clear and concise in your explanation.
• Provide a justification for subject selection and sampling procedure . For instance, if you propose to conduct interviews, how do you intend to select the sample population? If you are analyzing texts, which texts have you chosen, and why? If you are using statistics, why is this set of data being used? If other data sources exist, explain why the data you chose is most appropriate to addressing the research problem.
• Provide a justification for case study selection . A common method of analyzing research problems in the social sciences is to analyze specific cases. These can be a person, place, event, phenomenon, or other type of subject of analysis that are either examined as a singular topic of in-depth investigation or multiple topics of investigation studied for the purpose of comparing or contrasting findings. In either method, you should explain why a case or cases were chosen and how they specifically relate to the research problem.
• Describe potential limitations . Are there any practical limitations that could affect your data collection? How will you attempt to control for potential confounding variables and errors? If your methodology may lead to problems you can anticipate, state this openly and show why pursuing this methodology outweighs the risk of these problems cropping up.

NOTE :   Once you have written all of the elements of the methods section, subsequent revisions should focus on how to present those elements as clearly and as logically as possibly. The description of how you prepared to study the research problem, how you gathered the data, and the protocol for analyzing the data should be organized chronologically. For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be presented, information should be presented in sub-sections according to topic. If necessary, consider using appendices for raw data.

ANOTHER NOTE : If you are conducting a qualitative analysis of a research problem , the methodology section generally requires a more elaborate description of the methods used as well as an explanation of the processes applied to gathering and analyzing of data than is generally required for studies using quantitative methods. Because you are the primary instrument for generating the data [e.g., through interviews or observations], the process for collecting that data has a significantly greater impact on producing the findings. Therefore, qualitative research requires a more detailed description of the methods used.

YET ANOTHER NOTE :   If your study involves interviews, observations, or other qualitative techniques involving human subjects , you may be required to obtain approval from the university's Office for the Protection of Research Subjects before beginning your research. This is not a common procedure for most undergraduate level student research assignments. However, i f your professor states you need approval, you must include a statement in your methods section that you received official endorsement and adequate informed consent from the office and that there was a clear assessment and minimization of risks to participants and to the university. This statement informs the reader that your study was conducted in an ethical and responsible manner. In some cases, the approval notice is included as an appendix to your paper.

III.  Problems to Avoid

Irrelevant Detail The methodology section of your paper should be thorough but concise. Do not provide any background information that does not directly help the reader understand why a particular method was chosen, how the data was gathered or obtained, and how the data was analyzed in relation to the research problem [note: analyzed, not interpreted! Save how you interpreted the findings for the discussion section]. With this in mind, the page length of your methods section will generally be less than any other section of your paper except the conclusion.

Unnecessary Explanation of Basic Procedures Remember that you are not writing a how-to guide about a particular method. You should make the assumption that readers possess a basic understanding of how to investigate the research problem on their own and, therefore, you do not have to go into great detail about specific methodological procedures. The focus should be on how you applied a method , not on the mechanics of doing a method. An exception to this rule is if you select an unconventional methodological approach; if this is the case, be sure to explain why this approach was chosen and how it enhances the overall process of discovery.

Problem Blindness It is almost a given that you will encounter problems when collecting or generating your data, or, gaps will exist in existing data or archival materials. Do not ignore these problems or pretend they did not occur. Often, documenting how you overcame obstacles can form an interesting part of the methodology. It demonstrates to the reader that you can provide a cogent rationale for the decisions you made to minimize the impact of any problems that arose.

Literature Review Just as the literature review section of your paper provides an overview of sources you have examined while researching a particular topic, the methodology section should cite any sources that informed your choice and application of a particular method [i.e., the choice of a survey should include any citations to the works you used to help construct the survey].

It’s More than Sources of Information! A description of a research study's method should not be confused with a description of the sources of information. Such a list of sources is useful in and of itself, especially if it is accompanied by an explanation about the selection and use of the sources. The description of the project's methodology complements a list of sources in that it sets forth the organization and interpretation of information emanating from those sources.

Azevedo, L.F. et al. "How to Write a Scientific Paper: Writing the Methods Section." Revista Portuguesa de Pneumologia 17 (2011): 232-238; Blair Lorrie. “Choosing a Methodology.” In Writing a Graduate Thesis or Dissertation , Teaching Writing Series. (Rotterdam: Sense Publishers 2016), pp. 49-72; Butin, Dan W. The Education Dissertation A Guide for Practitioner Scholars . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2010; Carter, Susan. Structuring Your Research Thesis . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012; Kallet, Richard H. “How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper.” Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004):1229-1232; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008. Methods Section. The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Rudestam, Kjell Erik and Rae R. Newton. “The Method Chapter: Describing Your Research Plan.” In Surviving Your Dissertation: A Comprehensive Guide to Content and Process . (Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, 2015), pp. 87-115; What is Interpretive Research. Institute of Public and International Affairs, University of Utah; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Methods and Materials. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College.

Writing Tip

Statistical Designs and Tests? Do Not Fear Them!

Don't avoid using a quantitative approach to analyzing your research problem just because you fear the idea of applying statistical designs and tests. A qualitative approach, such as conducting interviews or content analysis of archival texts, can yield exciting new insights about a research problem, but it should not be undertaken simply because you have a disdain for running a simple regression. A well designed quantitative research study can often be accomplished in very clear and direct ways, whereas, a similar study of a qualitative nature usually requires considerable time to analyze large volumes of data and a tremendous burden to create new paths for analysis where previously no path associated with your research problem had existed.

To locate data and statistics, GO HERE .

Another Writing Tip

Knowing the Relationship Between Theories and Methods

There can be multiple meaning associated with the term "theories" and the term "methods" in social sciences research. A helpful way to delineate between them is to understand "theories" as representing different ways of characterizing the social world when you research it and "methods" as representing different ways of generating and analyzing data about that social world. Framed in this way, all empirical social sciences research involves theories and methods, whether they are stated explicitly or not. However, while theories and methods are often related, it is important that, as a researcher, you deliberately separate them in order to avoid your theories playing a disproportionate role in shaping what outcomes your chosen methods produce.

Introspectively engage in an ongoing dialectic between the application of theories and methods to help enable you to use the outcomes from your methods to interrogate and develop new theories, or ways of framing conceptually the research problem. This is how scholarship grows and branches out into new intellectual territory.

Reynolds, R. Larry. Ways of Knowing. Alternative Microeconomics . Part 1, Chapter 3. Boise State University; The Theory-Method Relationship. S-Cool Revision. United Kingdom.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Methods and the Methodology

Do not confuse the terms "methods" and "methodology." As Schneider notes, a method refers to the technical steps taken to do research . Descriptions of methods usually include defining and stating why you have chosen specific techniques to investigate a research problem, followed by an outline of the procedures you used to systematically select, gather, and process the data [remember to always save the interpretation of data for the discussion section of your paper].

The methodology refers to a discussion of the underlying reasoning why particular methods were used . This discussion includes describing the theoretical concepts that inform the choice of methods to be applied, placing the choice of methods within the more general nature of academic work, and reviewing its relevance to examining the research problem. The methodology section also includes a thorough review of the methods other scholars have used to study the topic.

Bryman, Alan. "Of Methods and Methodology." Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal 3 (2008): 159-168; Schneider, Florian. “What's in a Methodology: The Difference between Method, Methodology, and Theory…and How to Get the Balance Right?” PoliticsEastAsia.com. Chinese Department, University of Leiden, Netherlands.

• << Previous: Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Next: Qualitative Methods >>
• Last Updated: May 20, 2024 9:47 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections
• How to Write Your Methods

Ensure understanding, reproducibility and replicability

What should you include in your methods section, and how much detail is appropriate?

Why Methods Matter

The methods section was once the most likely part of a paper to be unfairly abbreviated, overly summarized, or even relegated to hard-to-find sections of a publisher’s website. While some journals may responsibly include more detailed elements of methods in supplementary sections, the movement for increased reproducibility and rigor in science has reinstated the importance of the methods section. Methods are now viewed as a key element in establishing the credibility of the research being reported, alongside the open availability of data and results.

A clear methods section impacts editorial evaluation and readers’ understanding, and is also the backbone of transparency and replicability.

For example, the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology project set out in 2013 to replicate experiments from 50 high profile cancer papers, but revised their target to 18 papers once they understood how much methodological detail was not contained in the original papers.

What to include in your methods section

What you include in your methods sections depends on what field you are in and what experiments you are performing. However, the general principle in place at the majority of journals is summarized well by the guidelines at PLOS ONE : “The Materials and Methods section should provide enough detail to allow suitably skilled investigators to fully replicate your study. ” The emphases here are deliberate: the methods should enable readers to understand your paper, and replicate your study. However, there is no need to go into the level of detail that a lay-person would require—the focus is on the reader who is also trained in your field, with the suitable skills and knowledge to attempt a replication.

A constant principle of rigorous science

A methods section that enables other researchers to understand and replicate your results is a constant principle of rigorous, transparent, and Open Science. Aim to be thorough, even if a particular journal doesn’t require the same level of detail . Reproducibility is all of our responsibility. You cannot create any problems by exceeding a minimum standard of information. If a journal still has word-limits—either for the overall article or specific sections—and requires some methodological details to be in a supplemental section, that is OK as long as the extra details are searchable and findable .

Imagine replicating your own work, years in the future

As part of PLOS’ presentation on Reproducibility and Open Publishing (part of UCSF’s Reproducibility Series ) we recommend planning the level of detail in your methods section by imagining you are writing for your future self, replicating your own work. When you consider that you might be at a different institution, with different account logins, applications, resources, and access levels—you can help yourself imagine the level of specificity that you yourself would require to redo the exact experiment. Consider:

• Which details would you need to be reminded of? 
• Which cell line, or antibody, or software, or reagent did you use, and does it have a Research Resource ID (RRID) that you can cite?
• Which version of a questionnaire did you use in your survey? 
• Exactly which visual stimulus did you show participants, and is it publicly available? 
• What participants did you decide to exclude? 
• What process did you adjust, during your work? 

Tip: Be sure to capture any changes to your protocols

You yourself would want to know about any adjustments, if you ever replicate the work, so you can surmise that anyone else would want to as well. Even if a necessary adjustment you made was not ideal, transparency is the key to ensuring this is not regarded as an issue in the future. It is far better to transparently convey any non-optimal methods, or methodological constraints, than to conceal them, which could result in reproducibility or ethical issues downstream.

Visual aids for methods help when reading the whole paper

Consider whether a visual representation of your methods could be appropriate or aid understanding your process. A visual reference readers can easily return to, like a flow-diagram, decision-tree, or checklist, can help readers to better understand the complete article, not just the methods section.

Ethical Considerations

In addition to describing what you did, it is just as important to assure readers that you also followed all relevant ethical guidelines when conducting your research. While ethical standards and reporting guidelines are often presented in a separate section of a paper, ensure that your methods and protocols actually follow these guidelines. Read more about ethics .

Existing standards, checklists, guidelines, partners

While the level of detail contained in a methods section should be guided by the universal principles of rigorous science outlined above, various disciplines, fields, and projects have worked hard to design and develop consistent standards, guidelines, and tools to help with reporting all types of experiment. Below, you’ll find some of the key initiatives. Ensure you read the submission guidelines for the specific journal you are submitting to, in order to discover any further journal- or field-specific policies to follow, or initiatives/tools to utilize.

Tip: Keep your paper moving forward by providing the proper paperwork up front

Be sure to check the journal guidelines and provide the necessary documents with your manuscript submission. Collecting the necessary documentation can greatly slow the first round of peer review, or cause delays when you submit your revision.

Randomized Controlled Trials – CONSORT The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) project covers various initiatives intended to prevent the problems of  inadequate reporting of randomized controlled trials. The primary initiative is an evidence-based minimum set of recommendations for reporting randomized trials known as the CONSORT Statement . 

Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses – PRISMA The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses ( PRISMA ) is an evidence-based minimum set of items focusing  on the reporting of  reviews evaluating randomized trials and other types of research.

Research using Animals – ARRIVE The Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments ( ARRIVE ) guidelines encourage maximizing the information reported in research using animals thereby minimizing unnecessary studies. (Original study and proposal , and updated guidelines , in PLOS Biology .) 

Laboratory Protocols Protocols.io has developed a platform specifically for the sharing and updating of laboratory protocols , which are assigned their own DOI and can be linked from methods sections of papers to enhance reproducibility. Contextualize your protocol and improve discovery with an accompanying Lab Protocol article in PLOS ONE .

Consistent reporting of Materials, Design, and Analysis – the MDAR checklist A cross-publisher group of editors and experts have developed, tested, and rolled out a checklist to help establish and harmonize reporting standards in the Life Sciences . The checklist , which is available for use by authors to compile their methods, and editors/reviewers to check methods, establishes a minimum set of requirements in transparent reporting and is adaptable to any discipline within the Life Sciences, by covering a breadth of potentially relevant methodological items and considerations. If you are in the Life Sciences and writing up your methods section, try working through the MDAR checklist and see whether it helps you include all relevant details into your methods, and whether it reminded you of anything you might have missed otherwise.

Summary Writing tips

The main challenge you may find when writing your methods is keeping it readable AND covering all the details needed for reproducibility and replicability. While this is difficult, do not compromise on rigorous standards for credibility!

• Keep in mind future replicability, alongside understanding and readability.
• Follow checklists, and field- and journal-specific guidelines.
• Consider a commitment to rigorous and transparent science a personal responsibility, and not just adhering to journal guidelines.
• Establish whether there are persistent identifiers for any research resources you use that can be specifically cited in your methods section.
• Deposit your laboratory protocols in Protocols.io, establishing a permanent link to them. You can update your protocols later if you improve on them, as can future scientists who follow your protocols.
• Consider visual aids like flow-diagrams, lists, to help with reading other sections of the paper.
• Be specific about all decisions made during the experiments that someone reproducing your work would need to know.

Don’t

• Summarize or abbreviate methods without giving full details in a discoverable supplemental section.
• Presume you will always be able to remember how you performed the experiments, or have access to private or institutional notebooks and resources.
• Attempt to hide constraints or non-optimal decisions you had to make–transparency is the key to ensuring the credibility of your research.
• How to Write a Great Title
• How to Write an Abstract
• How to Report Statistics
• How to Write Discussions and Conclusions
• How to Edit Your Work

The contents of the Peer Review Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

The contents of the Writing Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher…

Research Procedures

• Open Access
• First Online: 28 March 2023

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• Ivan Buljan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8719-7277 3  

Part of the book series: Collaborative Bioethics ((CB,volume 1))

7088 Accesses

This chapter offers a guide on how to implement good research practices in research procedures, following the logical steps in research planning from idea development to the planning of analysis of collected data and data sharing. This chapter argues that sound research methodology is a foundation for responsible science. At the beginning of each part of the chapter, the subtitles are formulated as questions that may arise during your research process, in the attempt to bring the content closer to the everyday questions you may encounter in research. We hope to stimulate insight into how much we can predict about a research study before it even begins. Research integrity and research ethics are not presented as separate aspects of research planning, but as integral parts that are important from the beginning, and which often set the directions of research activities in the study.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Ethical Issues in Research Methods

Research Integrity: Responsible Conduct of Research

• Research plan
• Research question
• Study design
• Measurement
• Protocol registration
• Reproducibility

What This Chapter Is About

Case scenario: planning research.

This hypothetical scenario was adapted from a narrative about the process of poor research planning and its consequences. The original case scenario is developed by the Members of The Embassy of Good Science and is available at the Embassy of Good Science . The case is published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, version 4.0 (CC BY-SA 4.0).

Professor Gallagher is a leader of a research project on moral intuitions in the field of psychology. She is working on the project with Dr. Jones, a philosopher, and Mr. Singh, a doctoral student. Although she has little experience in the matter, Dr. Jones is put as the principal investigator in the study design and analysis of the two experiments, while Mr. Singh prepares materials and conducts the experiments.

After the first experimental study, Mr. Singh sends the results to Dr. Jones for analysis. After some time, eager to enter the results in his thesis, Singh asks Dr. Jones about the results of the study. She admits that she forgot to formulate the hypothesis before data analysis, and now the results can be interpreted as confirmatory, regardless of the direction. They decide to formulate a hypothesis that will result in a positive finding.

Mr. Singh and Dr. Jones present the results to Dr. Gallagher, who is satisfied and proceeds with paper writing. In the second study, Dr. Jones formulates multiple hypotheses before the study begins. Mr. Singh conducts the study and sends the results to Dr. Jones. She performs the analysis by trying to find only significant differences between groups. Finally, to achieve significance, she excludes participants over 60 years from the analysis and while presenting the results, admits that to Prof Gallagher. Prof Galagher is happy about the results and proceeds with the paper writing, while Mr. Singh enters the results in his dissertation.

Before Mr. Singh has the public defense of his dissertation, one of the internal reviewers notices that some data has been excluded from the second study and only significant results were reported. She invites Mr. Singh for an examination board meeting during which MR Singh admits that the data has been excluded and that in the first study hypothesis was formulated after the results were known.

Questions for You

Why is hypothesizing after the results are known, as described in the first study, considered problematic?

What was wrong about reporting only significant results in Study 2?

How would you improve the entire research process described in the scenario?

Good research practice from the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity:

Researchers take into account the state-of-the-art in developing research ideas.

Researchers make proper and conscientious use of research funds.

What to Do First When You Have an Idea?

It is difficult to come up with a good research idea, and if you struggle to come up with a new research direction, that is perfectly fine. Creative processes are the highest form of learning and developing an idea requires significant cognitive effort. In some cases, you may have an epiphany, where you would suddenly come up with a great idea for your research project. This is something popularized by stereotypes about scientists as eccentric figures who come up with brilliant ways of tackling things using only their intelligence and intuition. However, scientific work resembles ore mining. It takes a tremendous effort to read relevant scientific literature, communicate with your peers, plan, and, in some cases, attempt and fail before you even start digging for gold. As in a mine, you will need to dig a lot of rocks before you come across diamonds and gold.

Usually, the most important decisions are made before digging even begins. To decide where you will start mining, you start with the exploration of the terrain. In research, this means knowing your field of study. You may read an interesting piece in the scientific literature or listen to a presentation at a conference and then think of a hypothesis whose testing will answer an interesting and important question in your research field. On the other hand, sometimes you have to adjust your research interest so that they fit the specific aims of grant funding calls. It does not matter what the source of the idea is, there are always two things to consider when developing research ideas: the current state of the field and the resources available to you. Good research practice is to consider the state of the art in developing your research ideas and make the proper use of research funds. This does not mean that you are not allowed to develop research ideas if they address a research topic that has been neglected. It is the responsibility of a researcher to combine the best of the “old” evidence with new research developments. It is important to keep in mind that research is not performed in a vacuum and that the funds and resources provided by public or private funders are given with an expectation of an honest answer to a specific research question. The main responsibility for the proper use of research funds is on the researcher, and this is overseen by funders during and at the end of the proposal. Another recommendation refers to the use of state-of-the-art information as a basis for your research. The control system in this case is other scientists who read or evaluate your research, and who will recognize outdated research results.

Let’s get back to the analogy of the mine for a moment. If you are paid to dig in the mine, you are expected to find important ore. In our case, a research funder is an employer, and the researchers are workers who need to go down the mine and get their hands dirty in the search for new true information. If you are set to dig a deep hole in the ground with the possibility of finding gold and diamonds, but you do not get any guarantee that you will find them unless you chose an appropriate place in a specific period, you would probably spend a lot of time planning and trying to decide where to start digging, what to do when specific problems arise and to avoid ending with a huge number of worthless rocks instead of gold and diamonds. The process is similar to research planning since a significant amount of the research process can be defined before data collection begins. As valuable as it can be, a research idea is just a thought which needs to be translated into research practice to gain its full impact.

How to Formulate a Good Research Question?

Research is performed to answer a specific question. The research process can be observed as a complex tool that, if used properly, can give a clear answer to a posed question. The research question is the compass of the research process (or the mine if we continue with our mine analogy) since it determines the steps of the research process. It translates into specific research aims and, consequently, into testable research hypotheses. Formulation of a research question is a skill that develops over time, a skill that can be learned. Your research question should have a FINER structure, which stands for: F easible, I nteresting, N ovel, E thical and R elevant. Although initially developed as a set of recommendations for quantitative research, FINER recommendations can be applied to formulating a research question in any given field of science.

The feasibility of a research aim is often defined by time restrictions and funding because research is often burdened by deadlines and output requirements set by the funders. F easibility is also affected by the availability of technology, geographical restrictions, availability of participants, or availability of collaborators. If one considers all those factors, it is obvious that research interests play only a small part in the formulation of a research question. Ask yourself: What research can be published in an excellent journal if you have limited funds and only 1 year for research, with limited access to a specific technology? (Today, highly specialized experts may be a greater problem than the technology in question). You might experience that the formulation of the research question is mostly defined by non-research factors, because, in the end, it is better to have a completed than never-finished research.

There are other elements of the research question that are as important as feasibility. The first one to consider is E thics, which affects all parts of the research process due to its broad nature. If research is not ethical, then it should not be conducted. In a mining analogy, ethics is training and safety, which helps you to protect others and yourself during the entire process. To get back to the best research practices, researchers should make proper use of research funds and fulfill the basic research aim – the benefit to society. This also implies treating members of that society with respect, respecting their privacy and dignity, and being honest and transparent about the research process and results. Therefore, when determining the feasibility of a research study, ethics aspects are the first to consider, along with the objective factors of time, cost, and manpower.

I nterest, N ovelty, and R elevance from the FINER guidance are the elements of the research question that increase the chances of getting funding or the chances for a journal publication, and they are closely aligned. Regardless of the audience (researchers, publishers, non-experts), research should be new to be interesting and relevant. However, doing research just for the novelty’s sake is analogous to the digger who starts digging a new mine every couple of days. It gives you the thrill of a new beginning, but you have not dug deep enough to get to the real results. Relevance, defined in this context as a significant add-on to the current knowledge, can be assessed with a high probability of success by a thorough search for available evidence. The main aim of that process is to identify research or practice gaps that can be filled to improve general knowledge.

Interest is related to the principal internal motivation of an individual to pursue research goals. The interest to pursue research aims is difficult to assess. When planning research, do you consider that research is interesting to you, your peers, potential users, or all three? Probably the last, but here is the catch. Interest is the most subjective part of research planning. Research planning could be understood as a balance between your interest and all other factors that affect the research outcome. A good research idea is often the compromise between objective possibilities and a desire to make a research discovery. If the research idea is interesting but extremely difficult (or even impossible) to conduct in given circumstances, you will end up frustrated. On the other hand, if you decide to perform research based solely on convenience (because it is something for which is easy to get funded or someone is offering you a research topic you are not interested in), it will be very difficult to stay motivated to complete the study.

The more structured your research question is, the easier it is to determine which research design is best to test the hypothesis and statistical analysis is more straightforward. Let’s look at several examples of research questions in biomedical research: Are psychedelics more effective in the treatment of psychosis than the standard treatment? What are the opinions of young fathers on exclusive breastfeeding of their spouses? Which percentage of the population has suffered from post-COVID-19 syndrome? Intuitively, for each of posed research questions, we would try to find answers differently. In cases of comparison of treatment methods and assessment of population percentage, we could express the results quantitatively, e.g., we could state explicitly how much the psychedelics treatment is better compared to standard methods in terms of days of remission or everyday functionality or an explicit number of people in the sample who had COVID-19-related symptoms. On the other hand, the answers to the question about the opinions of young fathers about exclusive breastfeeding are not straightforward or numerical, but more textual and descriptive. It is an example of the research question that would be more suitable for qualitative research. Qualitative and quantitative study designs answer different types of research questions and are therefore suitable for different situations. It is important to carefully consider and choose the most appropriate study design for your research question because only then can you get valid answers.

To conclude, research question development is the crucial factor in setting research direction. Although framed as a single sentence, it defines numerous parts of the research process, from research design to data analysis. On the other hand, non-research factors also have an equal role in research questions and need to be considered.

Literature Search

In a literature search, researchers go through the relevant information sources to systematically collect information, i.e. foreground knowledge, about a specific research phenomenon and/or procedure. While research information is readily available online not only to researchers but to the whole public, the skill of systematic literature search and critical appraisal of evidence is a specific research skill. A literature search is closely tied with the development of the research aim, because you may want to change it after you read about previous research.

When doing a literature search, you must be careful not to omit previous studies about the topic. Here we have two directions that must be balanced. The first one is to do a very precise search to find specific answers, and the other one is to perform a wide, sensitive search that will include many synonyms and combinations of words to discover articles that related to a specific term. Both of those approaches have their advantages and disadvantages: a precise search is less time-consuming and retrieves a small number of studies. However, it may omit important results, so you may end up performing studies for which we already have established conclusions. This creates waste in research because you will spend time and resources, and involve participants in unnecessary work, which would be unethical. You may also miss citing important studies. On the other hand, if you perform a search that is too wide, you will spend a lot of time filtering for useful articles, which leaves less time for doing research.

Researchers design, carry out, analyze and document research in a careful and well-considered manner.

Researchers report their results in a way that is compatible with the standards of the discipline and, where applicable, can be verified and reproduced.

What Is the Optimal Study Design for My Research?

Study designs are one of the main heuristics related to the reader’s perception of the credibility of research information. Also, different study designs give answers to different research questions. It is intuitively easy to understand that different approaches should be taken if the question is about the percentage of infected people in the population vs about which drug is the most effective in the treatment of the disease. The roughest categorization of the study designs is observational and experimental (Box 3.1 ). However, in different scientific areas, even that type of categorization is not enough, since study designs can be theoretical, as in physics or mathematics, or critical, as in humanities, and those types of research will not be covered in this chapter.

Box 3.1 Types of Study Designs

Observational study designs :.

Case study / case series / qualitative study : All three types of study designs take into account a small number of participants and examine the phenomenon of interest in-depth but cannot make generalizations about the entire population.

Case-control study : Individuals with a certain outcome or disease are selected and then information is obtained on whether the subjects have been exposed to the factor under investigation more frequently than the carefully selected controls. This approach is quick and cost-effective in the determination of factors related to specific states (e.g., risk factors), but it relies too much on records and/or self-report, which may be biased.

Cross-sectional study : Best study design for determining the prevalence and examination of relationships between variables that exist in the population at a specific time. Although it is simple to perform, and relatively cheap, it is susceptible to various types of bias related to participant selection, recall bias, and potential differences in group sizes.

Cohort study : Participants are followed over a certain period (retrospectively or prospectively) and data are compared between exposed and unexposed groups to determine predictive factors for the phenomenon of interest.

Experimental study designs :

Randomized controlled trial (RCT) : Participants are allocated to treatment or control groups using randomization procedures to test the strength of the interventions.

Quasi-experimental trial : Participants are allocated to treatment or control groups to test the strengths of the interventions, but there is no randomization procedure.

For some research areas (e.g. health sciences, social sciences), there is another type of research often referred to as evidence synthesis, or literature review. The literature review is a review of evidence-based on a formulated research question and elements. They differ in their scope and methodology (Box 3.2 ).

Box 3.2 Most Common Types of Review

Systematic review : A type of review that searches systematically for, appraises, and synthesizes research evidence, often adhering to guidelines on the conduct of a review.

Scoping review : Type of review which serves as a preliminary assessment of the potential size and scope of available research literature to identify the nature and extent of research evidence (usually including ongoing research).

Meta-analysis : Statistical synthesis of the results from quantitative studies to provide a more precise effect of the results.

Rapid review : A type of review that assesses what is already known about a policy or practice issue, by using systematic review methods to quickly search and critically appraise existing research to inform practical steps.

Umbrella review : Specific type of review that searches and assesses compiling evidence from multiple reviews into one accessible and usable document. Focuses on broad conditions or problems for which there are competing interventions and highlights reviews that address these interventions and their results.

How to Assess which Study Design Is Most Suitable for Your Research Question?

Based on the research aim, one may already get a hint about which study design will be applied, since different study designs give answers to different research questions. However, very often a research question is not so straightforward. Sometimes the research aim could be to determine whether category X is superior to category Y, related to the specific outcome. In those cases, one must determine what the core outcome of the study is (e.g., testing of the effectiveness of two interventions, the scores on current differences between two groups, or the changes over time between different groups), and then it is not difficult to determine the study type in question. In principle, a single research question can be answered with a single study design. However, what we can also use are substitute study designs that can give approximate answers to the question we are asking but will never give as clear an answer as the appropriate design. For example, if we want to explore the reasons early-career researchers seek training in research integrity using a survey approach, we could list all possible answers and say to participants to choose everything that applies to them. The more appropriate study design would be to use a qualitative approach instead because in the survey approach the assumption is that we already know most of the reasons. The survey approach gives us the answer which answer is the most frequent of all. It is a subtle, but important difference. Similarly, although we can test causation using a cohort approach, the evidence for causation is never strong enough in a cohort study as it would be in an experimental study, simply because in a cohort study the researcher does not have control over the independent variable. For example, if we would test the effects of alcohol uptake on the occurrence of cancer, we would compare participants who drink versus those who do not drink to determine the incidence of cancer and make the conclusion about the association between alcohol and cancer. However, the true study design for testing the causation is the randomized controlled trial, where participants are randomized into the interventional and control group, the researcher can give an exact amount of alcohol based on persons’ weight, over a specific period, and in the end, compare the incidence between two groups. However, that type of study would not be an ethical study, so it is not possible to do it. So, there are subtle, but important differences which answer whether can specific and good formulated research questions can be tested and answered fully with only one study design, but due to the various reasons (time restrictions, ethics, cost-benefit analysis) we often use substitute study designs.

When describing people involved in the research process, researchers often refer to them as “participants” or “respondents” (in the case of surveys). A more precise term would be to name the group based on the population they are drawn from (children, people with specific diseases, or people from a specific geographical area). The appropriate term to use would be “participants”, since people are willingly involved in the research process, and the generation of new findings depends on them. Being a participant in a research process means that a person has willingly entered into a research, without any real or imagined coercion, possesses respect and interest for the research topic, with the understanding that positive aspects of research findings encompass the research situation and contribute to general knowledge. This would be a definition of an ideal participant and the researcher should avoid a situation where the participants are coerced to enter research, whether by situational factors or personal reasons because that will probably result in a decrease in motivation for participation and lower quality of research findings. To act ethically and to improve the quality of the research you have to inform participants about the reasons for the study, its purpose, research procedure, their rights, and expected outcomes. A potential pitfall in the research process can happen if all information were not given to participants at the beginning of a research. On the other hand, if a participant enters willingly into the trial, but possesses no real interest in the research topic, it may also affect the motivation for participation in research, because those participants may consider the topic irrelevant and not take the research process seriously (it is easy to imagine a situation where teenagers in a classroom willingly decide to take the survey and participate in research about personality traits, but quickly lose interest after the second page of the questionnaire). All those things are not reflected in the research report but may have an enormous influence on the research findings. Therefore, it is important to define the population of interest and try to motivate participants by providing them with all information before the research begins. Some additional ways to increase participant retention are financial rewards or similar incentives. There are several sampling strategies used when approaching participants for a study (Box 3.3 ).

Box 3.3 Most Common Sampling Methods

Simple random sampling : Each member of the defined population has an equal chance of being included in the study. The sampling is often performed by a coin toss, throwing dice, or (most commonly) using a computer program.

Stratified random sampling : The population of interest is first divided into strata (subgroups) and then we perform random sampling from each subgroup. In this way, the sample with better reflects the target population in specific (relevant) characteristics.

Cluster random sampling : In cluster sampling, the parts of the population (subgroups) are used as sampling units instead of individuals.

Systematic sampling : Participants are selected by equal intervals set before the data collection begins (e.g., every third of every fifth participant who enters the hospital).

Convenience sampling : Participants are approached based on availability. This is perhaps the most common sampling method, especially for survey research.

Purposive sampling : This is the most common approach in qualitative study designs. Researchers choose participants (or they define their characteristics in detail), based on their needs since participants with those special characteristics are the research topic.

It is difficult to give clear criteria on when to stop collecting data. In the case of pre-registered studies, the stopping rule is defined in the protocol. Examples include time restrictions (e.g. 1 month), or the number of participants (e.g. after collecting data on 100 participants). If the research protocol has not been pre-registered, then the stopping rule should be explained in detail in the publication, with reasons. In the latter case, it is never completely clear if the stopping happened after researchers encountered the desired result or if it has been planned. The practice of stopping after you collect sufficient data to support your desired hypothesis is highly unethical since it can lead to biased findings. Therefore, the best way of deciding to terminate the data collection is to pre-register your study, or at least define the desired number of participants by performing sample size calculation before the study begins and pre-registering your study. More about pre-registration and biases which it eliminates will be said later in the chapter.

Ethics of the Sample Size: Too Small and Too Big Samples

A common problem in sampling is that researchers often determine the desired number of participants in a study. The problem is that the response rate is always lower than 100% (in survey research it is often around 15–20%), and a certain percentage of participants drops out of research, resulting in a sample size significantly lower than initially planned. The sample used in research can be too small, and there is a possibility that you will not find a true effect between groups, and in that case, you would make a type II error. The reason is that in small-scale studies the error margin is big, and you would need an extremely large effect size to reach statistical significance. On the other hand, in cases of a big sample, the problem is different. If you have big samples, even small effects will be statistically significant, but the effect size may be negligible. The reason is that within big samples, the margin of error is small, and consequently, every difference is statistically significant. Once again, the proper solution (practically and ethically) for this issue is to calculate the minimum sample size needed to determine the desired difference between groups to avoid the issues with small samples and report effect sizes also, to avoid issues related to (too) big samples.

What We Can and What Cannot Measure?

When it comes to measuring in research, that part is mostly associated with statistical analysis of research data. The principal thing in statistical analysis is to determine the nature of the main outcome variable. In qualitative research (e.g. interview, focus group) or a systematic review without meta-analysis, statistical analysis is not necessary. On the other hand, for quantitative studies (a term often used for mostly case-control, cross-sectional, cohort, and interventional studies) the most important part of the research plan is to define the outcome which can be measured.

In general, there are two types of variables: qualitative and quantitative. When it comes to statistical analysis of qualitative variables (in a statistical context you will encounter the terms nominal and ordinal variables), we can do only basic functions, like counting and comparing the proportions between different groups, but we are not able to calculate mean or standard deviation, because those variables do not possess numerical characteristics. Examples of qualitative variables in research can be the number of surviving patients in a group at the end of the trial, self-reported socioeconomic status as a demographic characteristic, or any binary (yes/no) question in a questionnaire. In some cases, qualitative variables may be coded with numbers, but that does not make them quantitative. A good example is jersey numbers where numbers serve only as a label and not as a measure of quantity (e.g. if you have team player numbers 2, 4, 6, you probably will not state that the average jersey number is 4 because the very concept of the “average” jersey number is absurd). On the other hand, for quantitative variables, differences between numbers indicate the differences in value (e.g. if you say that person X is 1.80 m high, you know that that person is taller than person Y who is 1.70 m tall). You can also calculate different statistical parameters, like mean and median, and dispersion measures, which gives you a more flexible approach in the choice of statistical tests, especially those tests for differences between groups. On the other hand, applying statistical tests would mean that you are more familiar with statistics, which sometimes may present a problem for less (and more) experienced researchers.

When Is the Time to Consult with a Statistician (and Do You Have to)?

Some (lucky) researchers possess sufficient knowledge to perform data analysis themselves. They usually do not need to rely on somebody else to do the statistical analysis for their study. For everybody else, statistical analysis is a crossroad where one needs to decide on including a person with statistical knowledge in a research team or to learn statistical analyses by themselves. The usual process is that the research team defines the research aim, spends time collecting data, collects data, and then tries to find a statistician who will analyse the data. If we keep in mind that research often has high stakes (e.g. doctoral diploma) and researchers are under a great time and financial pressure, the decision to include a statistician is sound and logical, but is it really necessary? The inclusion of a statistician in research when the data are already collected is similar to the situation when you give a cook an already finished stew and ask him/her how it can be improved. The cook may help with the decorations and give some spice which would make the food look and taste better but cannot change the essence of the food since it is already cooked. It is the same with data. The golden rule of statistics is “garbage in, garbage out”, referring to a situation where poorly collected data or data of poor quality will give rise to wrong conclusions. Researchers should know statistics, not only because of the statistical analysis but because statistical reasoning is important in the formulation of measurable research aims. Therefore, statistical analysis is an important part of responsible research and begins with the formulation of the research aim. Statistical experts should be included in the study at that point.

Statisticians usually analyse data based on the initially set research aim. They send back the results of the data analysis to the research team, and they all together (in an ideal scenario) write the manuscript. The dataset remains in the possession of the principal researcher and the paper is published in a journal. Many journals and funders require that the data are publicly available so that anyone can use it, respecting the FAIR principles. Keeping that in mind, the process when somebody else is doing statistical analysis for you requires an enormous level of trust for statisticians, because they can do analysis wrong but you may never know it. Unless, of course, someone else analyses publicly available data and sees the error. In that case, you are also responsible for the analysis because it does not matter that you did not perform it. In some cases, this may lead to the retraction of the paper, which consequently may lead to certain consequences for you (especially if the articles are the basis for a doctoral thesis). If you are willing to put trust in someone to do data analysis, that is perfectly fine, just be aware of this risk, and remember that people make mistakes, very often unintentionally, and therefore a double check by a third party would be recommended.

On the other hand, if you are willing to learn how to do statistical analysis, the good news is that today there are lots of resources to help you. The first thing about statistics you need to know is that you do not need to know all statistics to do statistics. The only knowledge about statistics and statistical programs you need is the one that would help you do the analysis of your research aim and test the research hypothesis. To do that, you will have to see the data you have and search online for ways to analyze a specific problem. You can use tutorials of the statistical program that simultaneously give instructions about the statistical principles and procedures for analysis. Today, most of those programs have online videos and detailed tutorials. Some of those programs are user-friendly and free (e.g., JAMOVI or JASP ), some are commercial (e.g., SPSS, Statistica), and some are less user-friendly but free and available (e.g., R programming language ). If you are a beginner, use a more user-friendly program that has detailed instructions and try to do the statistical analysis by yourself. It is expected that you will make errors, so it would be good if someone more experienced looked at the results and provides feedback on your first attempts.

There are many tutorials on how to do statistical analysis, but far less on how to do proper data entry, which is the preparation of data for statistical analysis. Usually, the data entry table is made in a computer program that provides a tabular view of the data (e.g., Microsoft Excel). The golden rule is that each column represents a variable collected in research, by the order it was collected in the research and that each row represents the unit of the analysis (usually participant, text, article, or any other unit). In a separate sheet or a document, there should be a codebook that contains information about each level of each variable in the dataset, in a way that a person who is not familiar with research can understand the nature of the variable. The codebook should always accompany the dataset, so if the dataset is shared publicly, the codebook should also be shared. The rule of thumb for the data entry is that textual variables are entered as texts and quantitative variables as numbers, and textual variables can later be coded with numbers if necessary. The table for data entry should be made before the research begins, and it is good to seek help from a statistician when defining that, too.

Researchers publish results and interpretations of research in an open, honest, transparent, and accurate manner, and respect the confidentiality of data or findings when legitimately required to do so.

Preregistration of Research Findings

Pre-registration refers to the presentation of the research plan before the research begins. This process serves as the quality control mechanism because it prevents a change in the research hypothesis and methodology to fit the data collected. Pre-registration of research findings should be done after the research has been approved by the ethics committee. There are various registries, some of which are more discipline-specific (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov for clinical studies) while others are open to different disciplines and study designs (e.g., Open Science Framework ). For the pre-registration of a study, one should clearly define all steps related to the research aim, methods, planned analysis, and planned use of data. Pre-registration of data is nothing more than the public sharing of a research plan. However, even that relatively simple procedure helps eliminate specific biases and decreases the probability of unethical behavior. Pre-registration eliminates the problem of h ypothesizing a fter the r esults are k nown (so-called HARKing) because you need to state your hypothesis publicly before the research begins. Pre-registration should be done before the actual research begins, since you may have already collected the data and modified your hypothesis so that it fits your data (this is called PARKing – p re-registering a fter the r esults are k nown), which should be avoided since it is not a true pre-registration.

Why is pre-registration good for research? When a study is pre-registered, researchers will follow the research plan and planned analysis and will not alter the study protocol and statistical analysis unless there is a valid and strong reason for protocol modification. Many journals today require that studies are pre-registered and that research data are shared. It is recommended to pre-register not only the study aim and methods, planned analysis, but also planned impact, data use, and authorship. When pre-registering authorship, you make clear from the beginning of the study the roles and expectations of each member of the research team. If during the research process some changes happen with the study protocol, those should be clearly explained and pointed out in the final publication, because deviations from the protocol can sometimes bring suspicion in the interpretation of the results if they are not reported. Pre-registration can be peer-reviewed and some problems, which would affect the final interpretation of the results, can be addressed even before the study begins. Finally, when pre-registered, you have the evidence that it was you who came up first with a specific research idea.

One problem that pre-registration cannot prevent is research spin or exaggeration in the scope of study results. Even if data have been carefully collected and properly analyzed, the interpretation of the results is up to the researcher. You should be honest (and modest) when interpreting the results of your study, by stating the true magnitude of your results and putting them in the context of the previous studies.

After the research has been published, the data used in research should be made available to everyone who wants to use them, since data sharing helps research replication and evidence synthesis. You can read more about data sharing in the chapter on Data Management and the chapter on Publication and Dissemination.

With this knowledge in mind, how would you improve the research procedure from the case scenario at the beginning of this chapter?

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health and Center for Evidence-based Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia

Ivan Buljan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ivan Buljan .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Medicine, University of Split, Split, Croatia

Ana Marusic

If You Want to Learn More

The embassy of good science.

Replicability

AllTrials campaign: https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:0bb5e4f7-9336-4ca8-92e3-c506413d1450

Forensic statistics to detect data fabrication: https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:467f5cf6-d41f-42a0-9b19-76556579845d

Pre-registration of animal study protocols

Prospective registration of clinical trials

Statistical pre-registration

Data driven hypothesis without disclosure (“HARKing”)

Insufficiently reported study flaws and limitations

Spin of research results .

Published Articles

Cooke A, Smith D, Booth A (2012) Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res 22(10):1435–1443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312452938

Grant MJ, Booth A (2009) A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf Libr J 26(2):91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x

Kerr NL (1998) HARKing: hypothesizing after the results are known. Personal Soc Psychol Rev 2(3):196–217. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_4

Lipowski EE (2008) Developing great research questions. Am J Health Syst Pharm 65(17):1667–1670. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp070276

Onwuegbuzie AJ, Leech NL (2006) Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedures. Qual Rep 11(3):474–498

Rau JL (2004) Searching the literature and selecting the right references. Respir Care 49(10):1242–1245

Richardson WS, Wilson MC, Nishikawa J, Hayward RS (1995) The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions. ACP J Club 123(3):A12–A13

Yamada Y (2018) How to crack pre-registration: toward transparent and open science. Front Psychol 9:1831. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01831

Hulley SB. Designing clinical research: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007.

University of Oxford. The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine .

HealthKnowledge .

Cummings SR, Browner WS, Hulley SB. Conceiving the research question and developing the study plan. In: Designing Clinical Research. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2013. p. 14–22.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Buljan, I. (2023). Research Procedures. In: Marusic, A. (eds) A Guide to Responsible Research. Collaborative Bioethics, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22412-6_3

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22412-6_3

Published : 28 March 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-22411-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-22412-6

eBook Packages : Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences (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

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology

Research Design | Step-by-Step Guide with Examples

Published on 5 May 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 20 March 2023.

A research design is a strategy for answering your research question  using empirical data. Creating a research design means making decisions about:

• Your overall aims and approach
• The type of research design you’ll use
• Your sampling methods or criteria for selecting subjects
• Your data collection methods
• The procedures you’ll follow to collect data
• Your data analysis methods

A well-planned research design helps ensure that your methods match your research aims and that you use the right kind of analysis for your data.

Table of contents

Step 1: consider your aims and approach, step 2: choose a type of research design, step 3: identify your population and sampling method, step 4: choose your data collection methods, step 5: plan your data collection procedures, step 6: decide on your data analysis strategies, frequently asked questions.

• Introduction

Before you can start designing your research, you should already have a clear idea of the research question you want to investigate.

There are many different ways you could go about answering this question. Your research design choices should be driven by your aims and priorities – start by thinking carefully about what you want to achieve.

The first choice you need to make is whether you’ll take a qualitative or quantitative approach.

Qualitative research designs tend to be more flexible and inductive , allowing you to adjust your approach based on what you find throughout the research process.

Quantitative research designs tend to be more fixed and deductive , with variables and hypotheses clearly defined in advance of data collection.

It’s also possible to use a mixed methods design that integrates aspects of both approaches. By combining qualitative and quantitative insights, you can gain a more complete picture of the problem you’re studying and strengthen the credibility of your conclusions.

Practical and ethical considerations when designing research

As well as scientific considerations, you need to think practically when designing your research. If your research involves people or animals, you also need to consider research ethics .

• How much time do you have to collect data and write up the research?
• Will you be able to gain access to the data you need (e.g., by travelling to a specific location or contacting specific people)?
• Do you have the necessary research skills (e.g., statistical analysis or interview techniques)?
• Will you need ethical approval ?

At each stage of the research design process, make sure that your choices are practically feasible.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Within both qualitative and quantitative approaches, there are several types of research design to choose from. Each type provides a framework for the overall shape of your research.

Types of quantitative research designs

Quantitative designs can be split into four main types. Experimental and   quasi-experimental designs allow you to test cause-and-effect relationships, while descriptive and correlational designs allow you to measure variables and describe relationships between them.

With descriptive and correlational designs, you can get a clear picture of characteristics, trends, and relationships as they exist in the real world. However, you can’t draw conclusions about cause and effect (because correlation doesn’t imply causation ).

Experiments are the strongest way to test cause-and-effect relationships without the risk of other variables influencing the results. However, their controlled conditions may not always reflect how things work in the real world. They’re often also more difficult and expensive to implement.

Types of qualitative research designs

Qualitative designs are less strictly defined. This approach is about gaining a rich, detailed understanding of a specific context or phenomenon, and you can often be more creative and flexible in designing your research.

The table below shows some common types of qualitative design. They often have similar approaches in terms of data collection, but focus on different aspects when analysing the data.

Your research design should clearly define who or what your research will focus on, and how you’ll go about choosing your participants or subjects.

In research, a population is the entire group that you want to draw conclusions about, while a sample is the smaller group of individuals you’ll actually collect data from.

Defining the population

A population can be made up of anything you want to study – plants, animals, organisations, texts, countries, etc. In the social sciences, it most often refers to a group of people.

For example, will you focus on people from a specific demographic, region, or background? Are you interested in people with a certain job or medical condition, or users of a particular product?

The more precisely you define your population, the easier it will be to gather a representative sample.

Sampling methods

Even with a narrowly defined population, it’s rarely possible to collect data from every individual. Instead, you’ll collect data from a sample.

To select a sample, there are two main approaches: probability sampling and non-probability sampling . The sampling method you use affects how confidently you can generalise your results to the population as a whole.

Probability sampling is the most statistically valid option, but it’s often difficult to achieve unless you’re dealing with a very small and accessible population.

For practical reasons, many studies use non-probability sampling, but it’s important to be aware of the limitations and carefully consider potential biases. You should always make an effort to gather a sample that’s as representative as possible of the population.

Case selection in qualitative research

In some types of qualitative designs, sampling may not be relevant.

For example, in an ethnography or a case study, your aim is to deeply understand a specific context, not to generalise to a population. Instead of sampling, you may simply aim to collect as much data as possible about the context you are studying.

In these types of design, you still have to carefully consider your choice of case or community. You should have a clear rationale for why this particular case is suitable for answering your research question.

For example, you might choose a case study that reveals an unusual or neglected aspect of your research problem, or you might choose several very similar or very different cases in order to compare them.

Data collection methods are ways of directly measuring variables and gathering information. They allow you to gain first-hand knowledge and original insights into your research problem.

You can choose just one data collection method, or use several methods in the same study.

Survey methods

Surveys allow you to collect data about opinions, behaviours, experiences, and characteristics by asking people directly. There are two main survey methods to choose from: questionnaires and interviews.

Observation methods

Observations allow you to collect data unobtrusively, observing characteristics, behaviours, or social interactions without relying on self-reporting.

Observations may be conducted in real time, taking notes as you observe, or you might make audiovisual recordings for later analysis. They can be qualitative or quantitative.

Other methods of data collection

There are many other ways you might collect data depending on your field and topic.

If you’re not sure which methods will work best for your research design, try reading some papers in your field to see what data collection methods they used.

Secondary data

If you don’t have the time or resources to collect data from the population you’re interested in, you can also choose to use secondary data that other researchers already collected – for example, datasets from government surveys or previous studies on your topic.

With this raw data, you can do your own analysis to answer new research questions that weren’t addressed by the original study.

Using secondary data can expand the scope of your research, as you may be able to access much larger and more varied samples than you could collect yourself.

However, it also means you don’t have any control over which variables to measure or how to measure them, so the conclusions you can draw may be limited.

As well as deciding on your methods, you need to plan exactly how you’ll use these methods to collect data that’s consistent, accurate, and unbiased.

Planning systematic procedures is especially important in quantitative research, where you need to precisely define your variables and ensure your measurements are reliable and valid.

Operationalisation

Some variables, like height or age, are easily measured. But often you’ll be dealing with more abstract concepts, like satisfaction, anxiety, or competence. Operationalisation means turning these fuzzy ideas into measurable indicators.

If you’re using observations , which events or actions will you count?

If you’re using surveys , which questions will you ask and what range of responses will be offered?

You may also choose to use or adapt existing materials designed to measure the concept you’re interested in – for example, questionnaires or inventories whose reliability and validity has already been established.

Reliability and validity

Reliability means your results can be consistently reproduced , while validity means that you’re actually measuring the concept you’re interested in.

For valid and reliable results, your measurement materials should be thoroughly researched and carefully designed. Plan your procedures to make sure you carry out the same steps in the same way for each participant.

If you’re developing a new questionnaire or other instrument to measure a specific concept, running a pilot study allows you to check its validity and reliability in advance.

Sampling procedures

As well as choosing an appropriate sampling method, you need a concrete plan for how you’ll actually contact and recruit your selected sample.

That means making decisions about things like:

• How many participants do you need for an adequate sample size?
• What inclusion and exclusion criteria will you use to identify eligible participants?
• How will you contact your sample – by mail, online, by phone, or in person?

If you’re using a probability sampling method, it’s important that everyone who is randomly selected actually participates in the study. How will you ensure a high response rate?

If you’re using a non-probability method, how will you avoid bias and ensure a representative sample?

Data management

It’s also important to create a data management plan for organising and storing your data.

Will you need to transcribe interviews or perform data entry for observations? You should anonymise and safeguard any sensitive data, and make sure it’s backed up regularly.

Keeping your data well organised will save time when it comes to analysing them. It can also help other researchers validate and add to your findings.

On their own, raw data can’t answer your research question. The last step of designing your research is planning how you’ll analyse the data.

Quantitative data analysis

In quantitative research, you’ll most likely use some form of statistical analysis . With statistics, you can summarise your sample data, make estimates, and test hypotheses.

Using descriptive statistics , you can summarise your sample data in terms of:

• The distribution of the data (e.g., the frequency of each score on a test)
• The central tendency of the data (e.g., the mean to describe the average score)
• The variability of the data (e.g., the standard deviation to describe how spread out the scores are)

The specific calculations you can do depend on the level of measurement of your variables.

Using inferential statistics , you can:

• Make estimates about the population based on your sample data.
• Test hypotheses about a relationship between variables.

Regression and correlation tests look for associations between two or more variables, while comparison tests (such as t tests and ANOVAs ) look for differences in the outcomes of different groups.

Your choice of statistical test depends on various aspects of your research design, including the types of variables you’re dealing with and the distribution of your data.

Qualitative data analysis

In qualitative research, your data will usually be very dense with information and ideas. Instead of summing it up in numbers, you’ll need to comb through the data in detail, interpret its meanings, identify patterns, and extract the parts that are most relevant to your research question.

Two of the most common approaches to doing this are thematic analysis and discourse analysis .

There are many other ways of analysing qualitative data depending on the aims of your research. To get a sense of potential approaches, try reading some qualitative research papers in your field.

A sample is a subset of individuals from a larger population. Sampling means selecting the group that you will actually collect data from in your research.

For example, if you are researching the opinions of students in your university, you could survey a sample of 100 students.

Statistical sampling allows you to test a hypothesis about the characteristics of a population. There are various sampling methods you can use to ensure that your sample is representative of the population as a whole.

Operationalisation means turning abstract conceptual ideas into measurable observations.

For example, the concept of social anxiety isn’t directly observable, but it can be operationally defined in terms of self-rating scores, behavioural avoidance of crowded places, or physical anxiety symptoms in social situations.

Before collecting data , it’s important to consider how you will operationalise the variables that you want to measure.

The research methods you use depend on the type of data you need to answer your research question .

• If you want to measure something or test a hypothesis , use quantitative methods . If you want to explore ideas, thoughts, and meanings, use qualitative methods .
• If you want to analyse a large amount of readily available data, use secondary data. If you want data specific to your purposes with control over how they are generated, collect primary data.
• If you want to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables , use experimental methods. If you want to understand the characteristics of a research subject, use descriptive methods.

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 Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, March 20). Research Design | Step-by-Step Guide with Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 14 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/research-design/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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
• J Cardiovasc Echogr
• v.28(3); Jul-Sep 2018

How to Write a Research Protocol: Tips and Tricks

Matteo cameli.

Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, University of Siena, Siena, Italy

Giuseppina Novo

1 Biomedical Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, Cardiology Unit, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy

Maurizio Tusa

2 Division of Cardiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Italy

Giulia Elena Mandoli

Giovanni corrado.

3 Department of Cardiology, Valduce Hospital, Como, Italy

Frank Benedetto

4 Division of Cardiology, Bianchi-Melacrino-Morelli Hospital, Reggio Calabria, Italy

Francesco Antonini-Canterin

5 High Specialization Rehabilitation Hospital, ORAS, Motta di Livenza, Treviso, Italy

Rodolfo Citro

6 Heart Department, University Hospital “San Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi D’Aragona”, Salerno, Italy

The first drafting of the protocol for a new research project should start from a solid idea with one or more of these goals:

• Overcoming the limits of the current knowledge in a determinate field with the aim of bridging a “knowledge gap”
• Bringing something new in a scarcely explored field
• Validating or nullifying previous results obtained in limited records by studies on a wider population.

A research proposal born with the intent to convince the others that your project is worthy and you are able to manage it with a complete and specific work plan. With a strong idea in mind, it is time to write a document where all the aspects of the future research project must be explained in a precise, understandable manner. This will successively help the researcher to present it and process and elaborate the obtained results.[ 1 ] The protocol manuscript should also underline both the pros and the potentialities of the idea to put it under a new light.[ 2 ]

Our paper will give the authors suggestions and advices regarding how to organize a research protocol, step by step [ Table 1 ].

Main sections and subsections in a complete research protocol

A research protocol must start from the definition of the coordinator of the whole study: all the details of the main investigator must be reported in the first paragraph. This will allow each participant to know who ask for in case of doubts or criticalities during the research. If the study will be multicentric, in the first section must be written also the number of the involved centers, each one possibly matched with the corresponding reference investigator.

Second section: Specific features of the research study

After completing the administrative details, the next step is to provide and extend title of the study: This is made for identifying the field of research and the aim of the study itself in a sort of brief summary of the research; the title must be followed by a unique acronym, like an ID of the protocol. If the protocol has been already exposed and approved by the Ethical Committee, it is appropriate to include also protocol number.

A list of 3–7 keywords must be listed to simplify the collocation of the protocol in its field of research, including, for example, disease, research tools, and analyzed parameters (e.g. three-dimensional echocardiography, right ventricle, end-stage heart failure, and prognosis).

The protocol must continue stating the research background that is the rational cause on the base on which the study is pursued. This section is written to answer some of these questions: what is the project about? What is already available in this field in the current knowledge? Why we need to overcome that data? and How will the community will from the present study?

As for an original research manuscript, the introduction to the project must include a brief review of the literature (with corresponding references). It is also fundamental to support the premises of the study, to underline the importance of the project in that particular time period and above all, of the materials and methods that will be employed. The rationale should accurately put in evidence the current lack in that field of scientific knowledge, following a precise, logical thread with concrete solutions regarding how to overcome the gaps and to conclude with the hypothesis of the project. A distinct paragraph can be dedicated to references, paying attention to select only the previous papers that can help the reader to focus the attention on the topic and to not excessively extend the list. In the references paragraph, the main studies regarding the object of the research but also state-of-art reviews updating the most recent discoveries in the field should be inserted.

The section should successively expose the study design: monocentric or multicentric, retrospective or prospective, controlled or uncontrolled, open-label or blinded, randomized or nonrandomized, and observational or experimental. It should also be explained why that particular design has been chosen.

At this point, the author must include the primary objective of the research, that is, the main goal of the study. This is a crucial part of the proposal and more than 4–5 aims should be avoided to do not reduce the accuracy of the project. Using verbs as “to demonstrate,” “to assess,” “to verify,” “to improve,” “to reduce,” and “to compare” help to give relevance to this section. Add also a description of the general characteristics of the population that will be enrolled in the study (if different subgroups are planned, the criteria on the base of which they will be divided should be specified); primary and secondary end-points, including all the variables that represent the measure of the objective (e.g., all-cause death, cardiovascular death, hospitalization, and side effects of a drug) follow in this section.

All the single parameters and variables that will be assessed during the study must be accurately and precisely listed along with the tools, the methods, the process schedule timing, and the technical details by which they will be acquired; Here, the author should explain how the Investigators who work in the other involved centers have to sent their results and acquired data to the Core Laboratory (e.g. by filled databases or by sending images).

A special attention must then be paid to clarify the planning of each examination the study patients will undergo: basal evaluation, potential follow-up schedule, treatment strategy plan, comparison between new and already-in-use drugs, dose and dosage of the treatment in case of a pharmacological study. This part can be enhanced by flowcharts or algorithms that allow a more immediate comprehension and interpretation of the study strategy.

This section may result more complete if one more subsection, illustrating the expected results, is included. Considering the idea at the base on the project, the endpoints and the pre-arranged objectives, the author can explain how its research project will

• Contribute to optimize the scientific knowledge in that specific field
• Give real successive implications in clinical practice
• Pave the way for future scientific research in the same or similar area of interest, etc.

The study population must be specified in detail, starting from inclusion criteria (including age and gender if it is planned to be restricted) and exclusion criteria: the more precise are the lists, the more accurate the enrollment of the subjects will be to avoid selection biases. This will also help to raise the success rate of the project and to reduce the risks of statistical error during the successive analysis of the data. The sample size should be planned and justified on the base of a statistic calculation considering the incidence and prevalence of the disease, frequency of use of a drug, etc., and possibly also indicating if the study considers a minimal or maximal number of subjects for each enrollment center (in case of multicentric studies).

This section of the protocol should end with some indications regarding timing and duration of the study: Starting and end of enrollment date, starting and end of inclusion date, potential frequency of control examinations, and timing of the analysis of the acquired data. If already settled, it can be useful to indicate also the type of statistical analysis that the investigators will apply to the data.

It is always necessary to prepare an informed consent to be proposed to the patient where premises, methods, and aims of the research together with advantages (e.g., some visits or diagnostic examinations for free) and possible risks derived from the participation to the study.

In this short section, various pieces of information regarding safety of the study must be added (a classification is fundamental in case of studies that expect the use of invasive procedures or drugs use). Usually, for nonobservational studies, an insurance coverage must be considered.

If the investigators have requested or plan to request funding or financial support, all the obtained resources must be listed to avoid conflicts of interest.

C ONCLUSION

Writing a complete and detailed document is a paramount step before starting a research projects. The protocol, as described in this paper, should be simply and correctly written but must clarify all the aspects of the protocol. The document could be divided into three different sessions to give all the parts the appropriate attention.

R EFERENCES

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Table of Contents

Research Process

Definition:

Research Process is a systematic and structured approach that involves the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data or information to answer a specific research question or solve a particular problem.

Research Process Steps

Research Process Steps are as follows:

Identify the Research Question or Problem

This is the first step in the research process. It involves identifying a problem or question that needs to be addressed. The research question should be specific, relevant, and focused on a particular area of interest.

Conduct a Literature Review

Once the research question has been identified, the next step is to conduct a literature review. This involves reviewing existing research and literature on the topic to identify any gaps in knowledge or areas where further research is needed. A literature review helps to provide a theoretical framework for the research and also ensures that the research is not duplicating previous work.

Formulate a Hypothesis or Research Objectives

Based on the research question and literature review, the researcher can formulate a hypothesis or research objectives. A hypothesis is a statement that can be tested to determine its validity, while research objectives are specific goals that the researcher aims to achieve through the research.

Design a Research Plan and Methodology

This step involves designing a research plan and methodology that will enable the researcher to collect and analyze data to test the hypothesis or achieve the research objectives. The research plan should include details on the sample size, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques that will be used.

Collect and Analyze Data

This step involves collecting and analyzing data according to the research plan and methodology. Data can be collected through various methods, including surveys, interviews, observations, or experiments. The data analysis process involves cleaning and organizing the data, applying statistical and analytical techniques to the data, and interpreting the results.

Interpret the Findings and Draw Conclusions

After analyzing the data, the researcher must interpret the findings and draw conclusions. This involves assessing the validity and reliability of the results and determining whether the hypothesis was supported or not. The researcher must also consider any limitations of the research and discuss the implications of the findings.

Communicate the Results

Finally, the researcher must communicate the results of the research through a research report, presentation, or publication. The research report should provide a detailed account of the research process, including the research question, literature review, research methodology, data analysis, findings, and conclusions. The report should also include recommendations for further research in the area.

Review and Revise

The research process is an iterative one, and it is important to review and revise the research plan and methodology as necessary. Researchers should assess the quality of their data and methods, reflect on their findings, and consider areas for improvement.

Ethical Considerations

Throughout the research process, ethical considerations must be taken into account. This includes ensuring that the research design protects the welfare of research participants, obtaining informed consent, maintaining confidentiality and privacy, and avoiding any potential harm to participants or their communities.

Dissemination and Application

The final step in the research process is to disseminate the findings and apply the research to real-world settings. Researchers can share their findings through academic publications, presentations at conferences, or media coverage. The research can be used to inform policy decisions, develop interventions, or improve practice in the relevant field.

Research Process Example

Following is a Research Process Example:

Research Question : What are the effects of a plant-based diet on athletic performance in high school athletes?

Step 1: Background Research Conduct a literature review to gain a better understanding of the existing research on the topic. Read academic articles and research studies related to plant-based diets, athletic performance, and high school athletes.

Step 2: Develop a Hypothesis Based on the literature review, develop a hypothesis that a plant-based diet positively affects athletic performance in high school athletes.

Step 3: Design the Study Design a study to test the hypothesis. Decide on the study population, sample size, and research methods. For this study, you could use a survey to collect data on dietary habits and athletic performance from a sample of high school athletes who follow a plant-based diet and a sample of high school athletes who do not follow a plant-based diet.

Step 4: Collect Data Distribute the survey to the selected sample and collect data on dietary habits and athletic performance.

Step 5: Analyze Data Use statistical analysis to compare the data from the two samples and determine if there is a significant difference in athletic performance between those who follow a plant-based diet and those who do not.

Step 6 : Interpret Results Interpret the results of the analysis in the context of the research question and hypothesis. Discuss any limitations or potential biases in the study design.

Step 7: Draw Conclusions Based on the results, draw conclusions about whether a plant-based diet has a significant effect on athletic performance in high school athletes. If the hypothesis is supported by the data, discuss potential implications and future research directions.

Step 8: Communicate Findings Communicate the findings of the study in a clear and concise manner. Use appropriate language, visuals, and formats to ensure that the findings are understood and valued.

Applications of Research Process

The research process has numerous applications across a wide range of fields and industries. Some examples of applications of the research process include:

• Scientific research: The research process is widely used in scientific research to investigate phenomena in the natural world and develop new theories or technologies. This includes fields such as biology, chemistry, physics, and environmental science.
• Social sciences : The research process is commonly used in social sciences to study human behavior, social structures, and institutions. This includes fields such as sociology, psychology, anthropology, and economics.
• Education: The research process is used in education to study learning processes, curriculum design, and teaching methodologies. This includes research on student achievement, teacher effectiveness, and educational policy.
• Healthcare: The research process is used in healthcare to investigate medical conditions, develop new treatments, and evaluate healthcare interventions. This includes fields such as medicine, nursing, and public health.
• Business and industry : The research process is used in business and industry to study consumer behavior, market trends, and develop new products or services. This includes market research, product development, and customer satisfaction research.
• Government and policy : The research process is used in government and policy to evaluate the effectiveness of policies and programs, and to inform policy decisions. This includes research on social welfare, crime prevention, and environmental policy.

Purpose of Research Process

The purpose of the research process is to systematically and scientifically investigate a problem or question in order to generate new knowledge or solve a problem. The research process enables researchers to:

• Identify gaps in existing knowledge: By conducting a thorough literature review, researchers can identify gaps in existing knowledge and develop research questions that address these gaps.
• Collect and analyze data : The research process provides a structured approach to collecting and analyzing data. Researchers can use a variety of research methods, including surveys, experiments, and interviews, to collect data that is valid and reliable.
• Test hypotheses : The research process allows researchers to test hypotheses and make evidence-based conclusions. Through the systematic analysis of data, researchers can draw conclusions about the relationships between variables and develop new theories or models.
• Solve problems: The research process can be used to solve practical problems and improve real-world outcomes. For example, researchers can develop interventions to address health or social problems, evaluate the effectiveness of policies or programs, and improve organizational processes.
• Generate new knowledge : The research process is a key way to generate new knowledge and advance understanding in a given field. By conducting rigorous and well-designed research, researchers can make significant contributions to their field and help to shape future research.

Tips for Research Process

Here are some tips for the research process:

• Start with a clear research question : A well-defined research question is the foundation of a successful research project. It should be specific, relevant, and achievable within the given time frame and resources.
• Conduct a thorough literature review: A comprehensive literature review will help you to identify gaps in existing knowledge, build on previous research, and avoid duplication. It will also provide a theoretical framework for your research.
• Choose appropriate research methods: Select research methods that are appropriate for your research question, objectives, and sample size. Ensure that your methods are valid, reliable, and ethical.
• Be organized and systematic: Keep detailed notes throughout the research process, including your research plan, methodology, data collection, and analysis. This will help you to stay organized and ensure that you don’t miss any important details.
• Analyze data rigorously: Use appropriate statistical and analytical techniques to analyze your data. Ensure that your analysis is valid, reliable, and transparent.
• I nterpret results carefully : Interpret your results in the context of your research question and objectives. Consider any limitations or potential biases in your research design, and be cautious in drawing conclusions.
• Communicate effectively: Communicate your research findings clearly and effectively to your target audience. Use appropriate language, visuals, and formats to ensure that your findings are understood and valued.
• Collaborate and seek feedback : Collaborate with other researchers, experts, or stakeholders in your field. Seek feedback on your research design, methods, and findings to ensure that they are relevant, meaningful, and impactful.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

Research Questions – Types, Examples and Writing...

Basic Steps in the Research Process

The following steps outline a simple and effective strategy for writing a research paper. Depending on your familiarity with the topic and the challenges you encounter along the way, you may need to rearrange these steps.

Step 1: Identify and develop your topic

Selecting a topic can be the most challenging part of a research assignment. Since this is the very first step in writing a paper, it is vital that it be done correctly. Here are some tips for selecting a topic:

• Select a topic within the parameters set by the assignment. Many times your instructor will give you clear guidelines as to what you can and cannot write about. Failure to work within these guidelines may result in your proposed paper being deemed unacceptable by your instructor.
• Select a topic of personal interest to you and learn more about it. The research for and writing of a paper will be more enjoyable if you are writing about something that you find interesting.
• Select a topic for which you can find a manageable amount of information. Do a preliminary search of information sources to determine whether existing sources will meet your needs. If you find too much information, you may need to narrow your topic; if you find too little, you may need to broaden your topic.
• Be original. Your instructor reads hundreds of research papers every year, and many of them are on the same topics (topics in the news at the time, controversial issues, subjects for which there is ample and easily accessed information). Stand out from your classmates by selecting an interesting and off-the-beaten-path topic.
• Still can't come up with a topic to write about? See your instructor for advice.

Once you have identified your topic, it may help to state it as a question. For example, if you are interested in finding out about the epidemic of obesity in the American population, you might pose the question "What are the causes of obesity in America ?" By posing your subject as a question you can more easily identify the main concepts or keywords to be used in your research.

Step 2 : Do a preliminary search for information

Before beginning your research in earnest, do a preliminary search to determine whether there is enough information out there for your needs and to set the context of your research. Look up your keywords in the appropriate titles in the library's Reference collection (such as encyclopedias and dictionaries) and in other sources such as our catalog of books, periodical databases, and Internet search engines. Additional background information may be found in your lecture notes, textbooks, and reserve readings. You may find it necessary to adjust the focus of your topic in light of the resources available to you.

Step 3: Locate materials

With the direction of your research now clear to you, you can begin locating material on your topic. There are a number of places you can look for information:

If you are looking for books, do a subject search in One Search . A Keyword search can be performed if the subject search doesn't yield enough information. Print or write down the citation information (author, title,etc.) and the location (call number and collection) of the item(s). Note the circulation status. When you locate the book on the shelf, look at the books located nearby; similar items are always shelved in the same area. The Aleph catalog also indexes the library's audio-visual holdings.

Use the library's  electronic periodical databases  to find magazine and newspaper articles. Choose the databases and formats best suited to your particular topic; ask at the librarian at the Reference Desk if you need help figuring out which database best meets your needs. Many of the articles in the databases are available in full-text format.

Use search engines ( Google ,  Yahoo , etc.) and subject directories to locate materials on the Internet. Check the  Internet Resources  section of the NHCC Library web site for helpful subject links.

Step 4: Evaluate your sources

See the  CARS Checklist for Information Quality   for tips on evaluating the authority and quality of the information you have located. Your instructor expects that you will provide credible, truthful, and reliable information and you have every right to expect that the sources you use are providing the same. This step is especially important when using Internet resources, many of which are regarded as less than reliable.

Step 5: Make notes

Consult the resources you have chosen and note the information that will be useful in your paper. Be sure to document all the sources you consult, even if you there is a chance you may not use that particular source. The author, title, publisher, URL, and other information will be needed later when creating a bibliography.

Step 6: Write your paper

Begin by organizing the information you have collected. The next step is the rough draft, wherein you get your ideas on paper in an unfinished fashion. This step will help you organize your ideas and determine the form your final paper will take. After this, you will revise the draft as many times as you think necessary to create a final product to turn in to your instructor.

Step 7: Cite your sources properly

Give credit where credit is due; cite your sources.

Citing or documenting the sources used in your research serves two purposes: it gives proper credit to the authors of the materials used, and it allows those who are reading your work to duplicate your research and locate the sources that you have listed as references. The  MLA  and the  APA  Styles are two popular citation formats.

Failure to cite your sources properly is plagiarism. Plagiarism is avoidable!

Step 8: Proofread

The final step in the process is to proofread the paper you have created. Read through the text and check for any errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Make sure the sources you used are cited properly. Make sure the message that you want to get across to the reader has been thoroughly stated.

Additional research tips:

• Work from the general to the specific -- find background information first, then use more specific sources.
• Don't forget print sources -- many times print materials are more easily accessed and every bit as helpful as online resources.
• The library has books on the topic of writing research papers at call number area LB 2369.
• If you have questions about the assignment, ask your instructor.
• If you have any questions about finding information in the library, ask the librarian.

Contact Information

Craig larson.

Librarian 763-424-0733 [email protected] Zoom:  myzoom   Available by appointment

Get Started

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

How to Write a Methods Section for a Psychology Paper

Tips and Examples of an APA Methods Section

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Emily is a board-certified science editor who has worked with top digital publishing brands like Voices for Biodiversity, Study.com, GoodTherapy, Vox, and Verywell.

Verywell / Brianna Gilmartin 

The methods section of an APA format psychology paper provides the methods and procedures used in a research study or experiment . This part of an APA paper is critical because it allows other researchers to see exactly how you conducted your research.

Method refers to the procedure that was used in a research study. It included a precise description of how the experiments were performed and why particular procedures were selected. While the APA technically refers to this section as the 'method section,' it is also often known as a 'methods section.'

The methods section ensures the experiment's reproducibility and the assessment of alternative methods that might produce different results. It also allows researchers to replicate the experiment and judge the study's validity.

This article discusses how to write a methods section for a psychology paper, including important elements to include and tips that can help.

What to Include in a Method Section

So what exactly do you need to include when writing your method section? You should provide detailed information on the following:

• Research design
• Participants
• Participant behavior

The method section should provide enough information to allow other researchers to replicate your experiment or study.

Components of a Method Section

The method section should utilize subheadings to divide up different subsections. These subsections typically include participants, materials, design, and procedure.

Participants 

In this part of the method section, you should describe the participants in your experiment, including who they were (and any unique features that set them apart from the general population), how many there were, and how they were selected. If you utilized random selection to choose your participants, it should be noted here.

For example: "We randomly selected 100 children from elementary schools near the University of Arizona."

At the very minimum, this part of your method section must convey:

• Basic demographic characteristics of your participants (such as sex, age, ethnicity, or religion)
• The population from which your participants were drawn
• Any restrictions on your pool of participants
• How many participants were assigned to each condition and how they were assigned to each group (i.e., randomly assignment , another selection method, etc.)
• Why participants took part in your research (i.e., the study was advertised at a college or hospital, they received some type of incentive, etc.)

Information about participants helps other researchers understand how your study was performed, how generalizable the result might be, and allows other researchers to replicate the experiment with other populations to see if they might obtain the same results.

In this part of the method section, you should describe the materials, measures, equipment, or stimuli used in the experiment. This may include:

• Testing instruments
• Technical equipment
• Any psychological assessments that were used
• Any special equipment that was used

For example: "Two stories from Sullivan et al.'s (1994) second-order false belief attribution tasks were used to assess children's understanding of second-order beliefs."

For standard equipment such as computers, televisions, and videos, you can simply name the device and not provide further explanation.

Specialized equipment should be given greater detail, especially if it is complex or created for a niche purpose. In some instances, such as if you created a special material or apparatus for your study, you might need to include an illustration of the item in the appendix of your paper.

In this part of your method section, describe the type of design used in the experiment. Specify the variables as well as the levels of these variables. Identify:

• The independent variables
• Dependent variables
• Control variables
• Any extraneous variables that might influence your results.

Also, explain whether your experiment uses a  within-groups  or between-groups design.

For example: "The experiment used a 3x2 between-subjects design. The independent variables were age and understanding of second-order beliefs."

The next part of your method section should detail the procedures used in your experiment. Your procedures should explain:

• What the participants did
• How data was collected
• The order in which steps occurred

For example: "An examiner interviewed children individually at their school in one session that lasted 20 minutes on average. The examiner explained to each child that he or she would be told two short stories and that some questions would be asked after each story. All sessions were videotaped so the data could later be coded."

Keep this subsection concise yet detailed. Explain what you did and how you did it, but do not overwhelm your readers with too much information.

Tips for How to Write a Methods Section

In addition to following the basic structure of an APA method section, there are also certain things you should remember when writing this section of your paper. Consider the following tips when writing this section:

• Use the past tense : Always write the method section in the past tense.
• Be descriptive : Provide enough detail that another researcher could replicate your experiment, but focus on brevity. Avoid unnecessary detail that is not relevant to the outcome of the experiment.
• Use an academic tone : Use formal language and avoid slang or colloquial expressions. Word choice is also important. Refer to the people in your experiment or study as "participants" rather than "subjects."
• Use APA format : Keep a style guide on hand as you write your method section. The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association is the official source for APA style.
• Make connections : Read through each section of your paper for agreement with other sections. If you mention procedures in the method section, these elements should be discussed in the results and discussion sections.
• Proofread : Check your paper for grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.. typos, grammar problems, and spelling errors. Although a spell checker is a handy tool, there are some errors only you can catch.

After writing a draft of your method section, be sure to get a second opinion. You can often become too close to your work to see errors or lack of clarity. Take a rough draft of your method section to your university's writing lab for additional assistance.

A Word From Verywell

The method section is one of the most important components of your APA format paper. The goal of your paper should be to clearly detail what you did in your experiment. Provide enough detail that another researcher could replicate your study if they wanted.

Finally, if you are writing your paper for a class or for a specific publication, be sure to keep in mind any specific instructions provided by your instructor or by the journal editor. Your instructor may have certain requirements that you need to follow while writing your method section.

Frequently Asked Questions

While the subsections can vary, the three components that should be included are sections on the participants, the materials, and the procedures.

• Describe who the participants were in the study and how they were selected.
• Define and describe the materials that were used including any equipment, tests, or assessments
• Describe how the data was collected

To write your methods section in APA format, describe your participants, materials, study design, and procedures. Keep this section succinct, and always write in the past tense. The main heading of this section should be labeled "Method" and it should be centered, bolded, and capitalized. Each subheading within this section should be bolded, left-aligned and in title case.

The purpose of the methods section is to describe what you did in your experiment. It should be brief, but include enough detail that someone could replicate your experiment based on this information. Your methods section should detail what you did to answer your research question. Describe how the study was conducted, the study design that was used and why it was chosen, and how you collected the data and analyzed the results.

Erdemir F. How to write a materials and methods section of a scientific article ? Turk J Urol . 2013;39(Suppl 1):10-5. doi:10.5152/tud.2013.047

Kallet RH. How to write the methods section of a research paper . Respir Care . 2004;49(10):1229-32. PMID: 15447808.

American Psychological Association.  Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association  (7th ed.). Washington DC: The American Psychological Association; 2019.

American Psychological Association. APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards . Published 2020.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Lab Report Format: Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

In psychology, a lab report outlines a study’s objectives, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions, ensuring clarity and adherence to APA (or relevant) formatting guidelines.

A typical lab report would include the following sections: title, abstract, introduction, method, results, and discussion.

The title page, abstract, references, and appendices are started on separate pages (subsections from the main body of the report are not). Use double-line spacing of text, font size 12, and include page numbers.

The report should have a thread of arguments linking the prediction in the introduction to the content of the discussion.

This must indicate what the study is about. It must include the variables under investigation. It should not be written as a question.

Title pages should be formatted in APA style .

The abstract provides a concise and comprehensive summary of a research report. Your style should be brief but not use note form. Look at examples in journal articles . It should aim to explain very briefly (about 150 words) the following:

• Start with a one/two sentence summary, providing the aim and rationale for the study.
• Describe participants and setting: who, when, where, how many, and what groups?
• Describe the method: what design, what experimental treatment, what questionnaires, surveys, or tests were used.
• Describe the major findings, including a mention of the statistics used and the significance levels, or simply one sentence summing up the outcome.
• The final sentence(s) outline the study’s “contribution to knowledge” within the literature. What does it all mean? Mention the implications of your findings if appropriate.

The abstract comes at the beginning of your report but is written at the end (as it summarises information from all the other sections of the report).

Introduction

The purpose of the introduction is to explain where your hypothesis comes from (i.e., it should provide a rationale for your research study).

Ideally, the introduction should have a funnel structure: Start broad and then become more specific. The aims should not appear out of thin air; the preceding review of psychological literature should lead logically into the aims and hypotheses.

• Start with general theory, briefly introducing the topic. Define the important key terms.
• Explain the theoretical framework.
• Summarise and synthesize previous studies – What was the purpose? Who were the participants? What did they do? What did they find? What do these results mean? How do the results relate to the theoretical framework?
• Rationale: How does the current study address a gap in the literature? Perhaps it overcomes a limitation of previous research.
• Aims and hypothesis. Write a paragraph explaining what you plan to investigate and make a clear and concise prediction regarding the results you expect to find.

There should be a logical progression of ideas that aids the flow of the report. This means the studies outlined should lead logically to your aims and hypotheses.

Do be concise and selective, and avoid the temptation to include anything in case it is relevant (i.e., don’t write a shopping list of studies).

USE THE FOLLOWING SUBHEADINGS:

Participants

• How many participants were recruited?
• Say how you obtained your sample (e.g., opportunity sample).
• Give relevant demographic details (e.g., gender, ethnicity, age range, mean age, and standard deviation).
• State the experimental design .
• What were the independent and dependent variables ? Make sure the independent variable is labeled and name the different conditions/levels.
• For example, if gender is the independent variable label, then male and female are the levels/conditions/groups.
• How were the IV and DV operationalized?
• Identify any controls used, e.g., counterbalancing and control of extraneous variables.
• List all the materials and measures (e.g., what was the title of the questionnaire? Was it adapted from a study?).
• You do not need to include wholesale replication of materials – instead, include a ‘sensible’ (illustrate) level of detail. For example, give examples of questionnaire items.
• Include the reliability (e.g., alpha values) for the measure(s).
• Describe the precise procedure you followed when conducting your research, i.e., exactly what you did.
• Describe in sufficient detail to allow for replication of findings.
• Be concise in your description and omit extraneous/trivial details, e.g., you don’t need to include details regarding instructions, debrief, record sheets, etc.
• Assume the reader has no knowledge of what you did and ensure that he/she can replicate (i.e., copy) your study exactly by what you write in this section.
• Write in the past tense.
• Don’t justify or explain in the Method (e.g., why you chose a particular sampling method); just report what you did.
• Only give enough detail for someone to replicate the experiment – be concise in your writing.
• The results section of a paper usually presents descriptive statistics followed by inferential statistics.
• Report the means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each IV level. If you have four to 20 numbers to present, a well-presented table is best, APA style.
• Name the statistical test being used.
• Report appropriate statistics (e.g., t-scores, p values ).
• Report the magnitude (e.g., are the results significant or not?) as well as the direction of the results (e.g., which group performed better?).
• It is optional to report the effect size (this does not appear on the SPSS output).
• Avoid interpreting the results (save this for the discussion).
• Make sure the results are presented clearly and concisely. A table can be used to display descriptive statistics if this makes the data easier to understand.
• DO NOT include any raw data.
• Follow APA style.

Use APA Style

• Numbers reported to 2 d.p. (incl. 0 before the decimal if 1.00, e.g., “0.51”). The exceptions to this rule: Numbers which can never exceed 1.0 (e.g., p -values, r-values): report to 3 d.p. and do not include 0 before the decimal place, e.g., “.001”.
• Percentages and degrees of freedom: report as whole numbers.
• Statistical symbols that are not Greek letters should be italicized (e.g., M , SD , t , X 2 , F , p , d ).
• Include spaces on either side of the equals sign.
• When reporting 95%, CIs (confidence intervals), upper and lower limits are given inside square brackets, e.g., “95% CI [73.37, 102.23]”
• Outline your findings in plain English (avoid statistical jargon) and relate your results to your hypothesis, e.g., is it supported or rejected?
• Compare your results to background materials from the introduction section. Are your results similar or different? Discuss why/why not.
• How confident can we be in the results? Acknowledge limitations, but only if they can explain the result obtained. If the study has found a reliable effect, be very careful suggesting limitations as you are doubting your results. Unless you can think of any c onfounding variable that can explain the results instead of the IV, it would be advisable to leave the section out.
• Suggest constructive ways to improve your study if appropriate.
• What are the implications of your findings? Say what your findings mean for how people behave in the real world.
• Suggest an idea for further research triggered by your study, something in the same area but not simply an improved version of yours. Perhaps you could base this on a limitation of your study.
• Concluding paragraph – Finish with a statement of your findings and the key points of the discussion (e.g., interpretation and implications) in no more than 3 or 4 sentences.

Reference Page

The reference section lists all the sources cited in the essay (alphabetically). It is not a bibliography (a list of the books you used).

In simple terms, every time you refer to a psychologist’s name (and date), you need to reference the original source of information.

If you have been using textbooks this is easy as the references are usually at the back of the book and you can just copy them down. If you have been using websites then you may have a problem as they might not provide a reference section for you to copy.

References need to be set out APA style :

Author, A. A. (year). Title of work . Location: Publisher.

Journal Articles

Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (year). Article title. Journal Title, volume number (issue number), page numbers

A simple way to write your reference section is to use Google scholar . Just type the name and date of the psychologist in the search box and click on the “cite” link.

Next, copy and paste the APA reference into the reference section of your essay.

Once again, remember that references need to be in alphabetical order according to surname.

Psychology Lab Report Example

Quantitative paper template.

Quantitative professional paper template: Adapted from “Fake News, Fast and Slow: Deliberation Reduces Belief in False (but Not True) News Headlines,” by B. Bago, D. G. Rand, and G. Pennycook, 2020,  Journal of Experimental Psychology: General ,  149 (8), pp. 1608–1613 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000729 ). Copyright 2020 by the American Psychological Association.

Qualitative paper template

Qualitative professional paper template: Adapted from “‘My Smartphone Is an Extension of Myself’: A Holistic Qualitative Exploration of the Impact of Using a Smartphone,” by L. J. Harkin and D. Kuss, 2020,  Psychology of Popular Media ,  10 (1), pp. 28–38 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000278 ). Copyright 2020 by the American Psychological Association.

Related Articles

Student Resources

How To Cite A YouTube Video In APA Style – With Examples

How to Write an Abstract APA Format

APA References Page Formatting and Example

APA Title Page (Cover Page) Format, Example, & Templates

How do I Cite a Source with Multiple Authors in APA Style?

How to Write a Psychology Essay

Abstract Submission Policies

Share your research with the physics community at aps meetings and events., aps membership and abstract submission eligibility, aps meeting eligibility.

You must be an APS member or member of a reciprocal society to submit an abstract. If you aren't yet a member, you can join APS . If you are a member, please log into your myAPS account to submit your abstract.

If you are an invited speaker or reciprocal society member, you do not need to be APS member to submit an abstract. However, you will need to create an APS web account .

Please review the list of reciprocal societies to learn if you are a member of a reciprocal society.

Unit meeting eligibility

Membership requirements vary when submitting an abstract to unit meetings. Please review upcoming unit meetings on the APS Calendar and the requirements detailed on the appropriate unit event website.

Verifying membership when submitting your abstract

You will need to include your APS membership ID number with your abstract submission. If you are a current member, you can find your membership ID number through your myAPS account .

After joining APS, you will receive your APS membership ID number within 24 hours. If you have joined APS but do not yet have your membership ID number, please enter "membership pending" when submitting our abstract and your membership will be verified after submission.

APS Membership will not issue membership ID numbers during the week of abstract deadlines, so please plan ahead.

Abstract deadlines

Abstracts must be submitted by the deadline to be guaranteed acceptance in the scientific program.

Meeting organizers are not obligated to include contributed abstracts submitted after the deadline.

Upcoming deadlines

Visit the meet meetings and events calendar to find upcoming meetings and submission deadlines.

Abstract submission guidelines

Please refer to the specific abstract submission instructions on the meeting or event website. In general, however, authors should:

• Thoroughly review and edit their abstracts before submitting
• Keep contributed abstract length within the 1,300 character limit
• Add all co-authors before the submission deadline
• Ensure the abstract is relevant to the topical scope of the meeting or event

When submitting your abstract, please include your preference for:

• An oral or poster presentation
• Your preferred presentation time and/or date
• Your preferred order of presentations within a session

At their discretion, event organizers will make an effort to accommodate these scheduling preferences. However, scheduling may be affected by time and space limitations.

Editing abstracts

APS will only correct mistakes and misspellings in the author’s name or affiliation. To edit abstract content, please withdraw the original abstract and resubmit a corrected version before the abstract submission deadline.

You cannot change your abstract content after author notification have been sent to submitters.

Withdrawing abstracts

After submitting your abstract, you will receive a confirmation email with the withdrawal deadline. Abstracts can be withdrawn online before this date and will not appear in the event program. Only the abstract submitter can request to withdraw an abstract.

After the withdrawal deadline, you must contact us to withdraw an abstract submission . The abstract will still appear as "abstract withdrawn" in the printed program, if one is available for the event.

Altered or rejected abstracts

APS may alter or reject abstracts based on the appropriateness of the content for the meeting or for other reasons such as:

• Excessive length
• Failure to comply with style guidelines
• Repeated cancellations from the submitter

Contributed abstract guidelines

Contributed abstract submission eligibility.

APS members and reciprocal society members may give one technical contributed presentation, either an oral or poster presentation, at March or April Meeting.

APS members may also submit a contributed abstract that lists a non-member as a presenter. The presenter must attend the meeting and give the presentation.

Technical and non-technical contributed submissions

For each presenting author, only one contributed oral abstract on a technical topic will be accepted into the scientific program. At our discretion, APS may accepted additional technical abstracts as poster presentations, if space is available.

An author may submit an additional oral abstract on a non-technical topic, such as education or policy, to present at a session sponsored by an APS Forum or Committee.

At the APS March and April meetings, oral presentations of contributed abstracts are given 10 minutes for presentation and two minutes for questions. Unit meeting presentation times vary.

Submitting and editing contributed abstracts

Please proofread your abstract carefully and thoroughly before submitting. APS will only correct system-generated LaTeX mistakes and misspellings in authors' names or affiliations. APS will not make additional edits, add new authors or reorder the author list.

When submitting your contributed abstract, please do not exceed 1,300 characters and please comply with the submission system style defaults—do not introduce your own formatting in the abstract.

March Meeting abstract edits

Submitters to APS March Meeting may edit abstracts in the online submission system up until the submission deadline.

Contributed abstract acceptance

If your contributed abstract is accepted, APS will notify you via email. You are responsible for confirming your session date and time and requesting changes by contacting APS Abstract Help .

Invited abstract guidelines

Invited speaker eligibility.

APS members may be invited to present a scientific abstract at March or April meeting.

Individual speakers may not be invited to speak at two consecutive meetings. That is, an invited speaker who presented at March Meeting 2023 may not present as an invited speaker at March Meeting 2024. Exceptions are made for speakers who will receive APS Prizes and Awards at the meeting.

Please review the speaker nominations instructions for more information.

In addition to their invited presentation, invited speakers may submit one contributed abstract for the scientific program. APS will communicated with invited speakers about submitting their abstracts and registering for the meeting.

Invited speakers must register to attend the meeting where they are presenting. Some invited speakers' registration fees may be sponsored by an APS unit.

Invited abstract submission instructions

Authors and collaborators.

Abstracts submitted for an invited speaker may only have that individual as the author. APS suggests that the invited speaker credit collaborating researchers in a footnote in the paper.

During the submission process, an invited speaker can add collaborators as co-authors. However, the invited speaker must give the presentation, unless a replacement speaker is agreed upon beforehand, as discussed with APS Abstract Help .

An invited paper is expected to have 30 minutes for presentation time, plus six minutes for a question and answer session.

Technical and non-technical invited submissions

If you are submitting an invited abstract, you may also submit one additional abstract of a non-technical nature, such as on education, history of physics or public policy. This abstract may be presented at a session, sponsored by an APS forum or committee , of broad concern to the physics community.

Invited abstract character limits

When submitting an invited abstract, please do not exceed the 2,000 character limit for your invited abstract text.

Withdrawing an invited abstract

If you accept an invitation to present but are later unable to do so, please contact APS Abstract Help .

Advice for abstract writing

As an initial summary of your research, your abstract and its title are your first chance to impress your audience and entice them to attend your presentation or read your paper.

When writing your abstract and title, think about your research's relevance and context. How does your research fit into the broad scope of the meeting where you will present?

Effective titles

When crafting an effective title, be sure that it:

• Predicts the abstract contents
• Contains important keywords
• Defines the research's purpose, scope, tone and methods

Parts of an abstract

Good abstracts include many of the parts of a paper, condensed or simplified to the most essential information:

• Introduction
• Previous or relevant references
• The goal of the project
• A description of how that goal was met
• Key results
• Details about why your results are unique or noteworthy

Additional advice

While writing your abstract, also keep the following in mind:

• Stay within the required character or word count
• Use proper submission format—often LaTeX, MS Word or plain text
• Ensure your abstract is understandable without reading the paper or seeing the presentation
• Define acronyms and minimize jargon

Abstract helpline

If you have questions or require assistance in submitting your abstract, please contact the APS Abstract Help team.

Phone: +1 (301) 209-3290 (Monday – Friday, 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. Eastern) Email : The APS Abstract help team

Join your Society

If you embrace scientific discovery, truth and integrity, partnership, inclusion, and lifelong curiosity, this is your professional home.

How to Write a Research Paper 

• Smodin Editorial Team
• Updated: May 17, 2024

Most students hate writing research papers. The process can often feel long, tedious, and sometimes outright boring. Nevertheless, these assignments are vital to a student’s academic journey. Want to learn how to write a research paper that captures the depth of the subject and maintains the reader’s interest? If so, this guide is for you.

Today, we’ll show you how to assemble a well-organized research paper to help you make the grade. You can transform any topic into a compelling research paper with a thoughtful approach to your research and a persuasive argument.

In this guide, we’ll provide seven simple but practical tips to help demystify the process and guide you on your way. We’ll also explain how AI tools can expedite the research and writing process so you can focus on critical thinking.

By the end of this article, you’ll have a clear roadmap for tackling these essays. You will also learn how to tackle them quickly and efficiently. With time and dedication, you’ll soon master the art of research paper writing.

Ready to get started?

What Is a Research Paper?

A research paper is a comprehensive essay that gives a detailed analysis, interpretation, or argument based on your own independent research. In higher-level academic settings, it goes beyond a simple summarization and includes a deep inquiry into the topic or topics.

The term “research paper” is a broad term that can be applied to many different forms of academic writing. The goal is to combine your thoughts with the findings from peer-reviewed scholarly literature.

By the time your essay is done, you should have provided your reader with a new perspective or challenged existing findings. This demonstrates your mastery of the subject and contributes to ongoing scholarly debates.

7 Tips for Writing a Research Paper

Often, getting started is the most challenging part of a research paper. While the process can seem daunting, breaking it down into manageable steps can make it easier to manage. The following are seven tips for getting your ideas out of your head and onto the page.

1. Understand Your Assignment

It may sound simple, but the first step in writing a successful research paper is to read the assignment. Sit down, take a few moments of your time, and go through the instructions so you fully understand your assignment.

Misinterpreting the assignment can not only lead to a significant waste of time but also affect your grade. No matter how patient your teacher or professor may be, ignoring basic instructions is often inexcusable.

If you read the instructions and are still confused, ask for clarification before you start writing. If that’s impossible, you can use tools like Smodin’s AI chat to help. Smodin can help highlight critical requirements that you may overlook.

This initial investment ensures that all your future efforts will be focused and efficient. Remember, thinking is just as important as actually writing the essay, and it can also pave the wave for a smoother writing process.

2. Gather Research Materials

Now comes the fun part: doing the research. As you gather research materials, always use credible sources, such as academic journals or peer-reviewed papers. Only use search engines that filter for accredited sources and academic databases so you can ensure your information is reliable.

To optimize your time, you must learn to master the art of skimming. If a source seems relevant and valuable, save it and review it later. The last thing you want to do is waste time on material that won’t make it into the final paper.

To speed up the process even more, consider using Smodin’s AI summarizer . This tool can help summarize large texts, highlighting key information relevant to your topic. By systematically gathering and filing research materials early in the writing process, you build a strong foundation for your thesis.

3. Write Your Thesis

Creating a solid thesis statement is the most important thing you can do to bring structure and focus to your research paper. Your thesis should express the main point of your argument in one or two simple sentences. Remember, when you create your thesis, you’re setting the tone and direction for the entire paper.

Of course, you can’t just pull a winning thesis out of thin air. Start by brainstorming potential thesis ideas based on your preliminary research. And don’t overthink things; sometimes, the most straightforward ideas are often the best.

You want a thesis that is specific enough to be manageable within the scope of your paper but broad enough to allow for a unique discussion. Your thesis should challenge existing expectations and provide the reader with fresh insight into the topic. Use your thesis to hook the reader in the opening paragraph and keep them engaged until the very last word.

4. Write Your Outline

An outline is an often overlooked but essential tool for organizing your thoughts and structuring your paper. Many students skip the outline because it feels like doing double work, but a strong outline will save you work in the long run.

Here’s how to effectively structure your outline.

• Introduction: List your thesis statement and outline the main questions your essay will answer.
• Literature Review: Outline the key literature you plan to discuss and explain how it will relate to your thesis.
• Methodology: Explain the research methods you will use to gather and analyze the information.
• Discussion: Plan how you will interpret the results and their implications for your thesis.
• Conclusion: Summarize the content above to elucidate your thesis fully.

To further streamline this process, consider using Smodin’s Research Writer. This tool offers a feature that allows you to generate and tweak an outline to your liking based on the initial input you provide. You can adjust this outline to fit your research findings better and ensure that your paper remains well-organized and focused.

5. Write a Rough Draft

Once your outline is in place, you can begin the writing process. Remember, when you write a rough draft, it isn’t meant to be perfect. Instead, use it as a working document where you can experiment with and rearrange your arguments and evidence.

Don’t worry too much about grammar, style, or syntax as you write your rough draft. Focus on getting your ideas down on paper and flush out your thesis arguments. You can always refine and rearrange the content the next time around.

Follow the basic structure of your outline but with the freedom to explore different ways of expressing your thoughts. Smodin’s Essay Writer offers a powerful solution for those struggling with starting or structuring their drafts.

After you approve the outline, Smodin can generate an essay based on your initial inputs. This feature can help you quickly create a comprehensive draft, which you can then review and refine. You can even use the power of AI to create multiple rough drafts from which to choose.

6. Add or Subtract Supporting Evidence

Once you have a rough draft, but before you start the final revision, it’s time to do a little cleanup. In this phase, you need to review all your supporting evidence. You want to ensure that there is nothing redundant and that you haven’t overlooked any crucial details.

Many students struggle to make the required word count for an essay and resort to padding their writing with redundant statements. Instead of adding unnecessary content, focus on expanding your analysis to provide deeper insights.

A good essay, regardless of the topic or format, needs to be streamlined. It should convey clear, convincing, relevant information supporting your thesis. If you find some information doesn’t do that, consider tweaking your sources.

Include a variety of sources, including studies, data, and quotes from scholars or other experts. Remember, you’re not just strengthening your argument but demonstrating the depth of your research.

If you want comprehensive feedback on your essay without going to a writing center or pestering your professor, use Smodin. The AI Chat can look at your draft and offer suggestions for improvement.

7. Revise, Cite, and Submit

The final stages of crafting a research paper involve revision, citation, and final review. You must ensure your paper is polished, professionally presented, and plagiarism-free. Of course, integrating Smodin’s AI tools can significantly streamline this process and enhance the quality of your final submission.

Start by using Smodin’s Rewriter tool. This AI-powered feature can help rephrase and refine your draft to improve overall readability. If a specific section of your essay just “doesn’t sound right,” the AI can suggest alternative sentence structures and word choices.

Proper citation is a must for all academic papers. Thankfully, thanks to Smodin’s Research Paper app, this once tedious process is easier than ever. The AI ensures all sources are accurately cited according to the required style guide (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.).

Plagiarism Checker:

All students need to realize that accidental plagiarism can happen. That’s why using a Plagiarism Checker to scan your essay before you submit it is always useful. Smodin’s Plagiarism Checker can highlight areas of concern so you can adjust accordingly.

Final Submission

After revising, rephrasing, and ensuring all citations are in order, use Smodin’s AI Content Detector to give your paper one last review. This tool can help you analyze your paper’s overall quality and readability so you can make any final tweaks or improvements.

Mastering Research Papers

Mastering the art of the research paper cannot be overstated, whether you’re in high school, college, or postgraduate studies. You can confidently prepare your research paper for submission by leveraging the AI tools listed above.

Research papers help refine your abilities to think critically and write persuasively. The skills you develop here will serve you well beyond the walls of the classroom. Communicating complex ideas clearly and effectively is one of the most powerful tools you can possess.

With the advancements of AI tools like Smodin , writing a research paper has become more accessible than ever before. These technologies streamline the process of organizing, writing, and revising your work. Write with confidence, knowing your best work is yet to come!

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

A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• About Mild TBI and Concussion
• After a Mild TBI or Concussion
• Health Disparities in TBI
• Comparing Head Impacts
• Clinical Guidance
• Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Management Guideline
• Resources for Health Care Providers

Traumatic Brain Injury & Concussion

About Moderate and Severe TBI

Preventing TBI

Symptoms of Mild TBI and Concussion

Where to Get Help

Facts About TBI

For Medical Professionals

Clinical Guidance for Pediatric mTBI

Health Care Provider Resources

CDC Programs

HEADS UP Online Training Courses

National Concussion Surveillance System

Core State Injury Prevention Program (Core SIPP)

A traumatic brain injury, or TBI, is an injury that affects how the brain works. TBI is a major cause of death and disability in the United States.

For Everyone

Health care providers.