research paper on definition

What Is a Research Paper?

• An Introduction to Punctuation

Olivia Valdes was the Associate Editorial Director for ThoughtCo. She worked with Dotdash Meredith from 2017 to 2021.

• B.A., American Studies, Yale University

A research paper is a common form of academic writing . Research papers require students and academics to locate information about a topic (that is, to conduct research ), take a stand on that topic, and provide support (or evidence) for that position in an organized report.

The term research paper may also refer to a scholarly article that contains the results of original research or an evaluation of research conducted by others. Most scholarly articles must undergo a process of peer review before they can be accepted for publication in an academic journal.

Define Your Research Question

The first step in writing a research paper is defining your research question . Has your instructor assigned a specific topic? If so, great—you've got this step covered. If not, review the guidelines of the assignment. Your instructor has likely provided several general subjects for your consideration. Your research paper should focus on a specific angle on one of these subjects. Spend some time mulling over your options before deciding which one you'd like to explore more deeply.

Try to choose a research question that interests you. The research process is time-consuming, and you'll be significantly more motivated if you have a genuine desire to learn more about the topic. You should also consider whether you have access to all of the resources necessary to conduct thorough research on your topic, such as primary and secondary sources .

Create a Research Strategy 

Approach the research process systematically by creating a research strategy. First, review your library's website. What resources are available? Where will you find them? Do any resources require a special process to gain access? Start gathering those resources—especially those that may be difficult to access—as soon as possible.

Second, make an appointment with a reference librarian . A reference librarian is nothing short of a research superhero. He or she will listen to your research question, offer suggestions for how to focus your research, and direct you toward valuable sources that directly relate to your topic.

Evaluate Sources

Now that you've gathered a wide array of sources, it's time to evaluate them. First, consider the reliability of the information. Where is the information coming from? What is the origin of the source? Second, assess the  relevance  of the information. How does this information relate to your research question? Does it support, refute, or add context to your position? How does it relate to the other sources you'll be using in your paper? Once you have determined that your sources are both reliable and relevant, you can proceed confidently to the writing phase. 

Why Write Research Papers? 

The research process is one of the most taxing academic tasks you'll be asked to complete. Luckily, the value of writing a research paper goes beyond that A+ you hope to receive. Here are just some of the benefits of research papers. 

• Learning Scholarly Conventions:  Writing a research paper is a crash course in the stylistic conventions of scholarly writing. During the research and writing process, you'll learn how to document your research, cite sources appropriately, format an academic paper, maintain an academic tone, and more.
• Organizing Information: In a way, research is nothing more than a massive organizational project. The information available to you is near-infinite, and it's your job to review that information, narrow it down, categorize it, and present it in a clear, relevant format. This process requires attention to detail and major brainpower.
• Managing Time: Research papers put your time management  skills to the test. Every step of the research and writing process takes time, and it's up to you to set aside the time you'll need to complete each step of the task. Maximize your efficiency by creating a research schedule and inserting blocks of "research time" into your calendar as soon as you receive the assignment. 
• Exploring Your Chosen Subject:  We couldn't forget the best part of research papers—learning about something that truly excites you. No matter what topic you choose, you're bound to come away from the research process with new ideas and countless nuggets of fascinating information. 

The best research papers are the result of genuine interest and a thorough research process. With these ideas in mind, go forth and research. Welcome to the scholarly conversation!

• Documentation in Reports and Research Papers
• Thesis: Definition and Examples in Composition
• An Introduction to Academic Writing
• How to Use Footnotes in Research Papers
• How to Write an Abstract
• Definition and Examples of Analysis in Composition
• What Is a Critique in Composition?
• How to Take Better Notes During Lectures, Discussions, and Interviews
• What Is a Literature Review?
• Research in Essays and Reports
• Topic In Composition and Speech
• Focusing in Composition
• What Is a Citation?
• What Are Endnotes, Why Are They Needed, and How Are They Used?
• What Is Plagiarism?
• Definition of Appendix in a Book or Written Work

Research Paper

• Icon Calendar 11 June 2024
• Icon Page 2825 words
• Icon Clock 13 min read

A research paper is a product of seeking information, analysis, human thinking, and time. Basically, when scholars want to get answers to questions, they start to search for information to expand, use, approve, or deny findings. In simple words, research papers are results of processes by considering writing works and following specific requirements. Besides, scientists study and expand many theories, developing social or technological aspects of human science. However, in order to provide a quality product, they need to know the definition of such a work, its characteristics, type, structure, format, and how to write it in 7 steps.

What Is a Research Paper and Its Purpose

According to its definition, a research paper is a detailed and structured academic document that presents an individual’s analysis, interpretation, or argument based on existing knowledge and literature. The main purpose of writing a research paper is to contribute to existing literature, develop critical thinking and scientific skills, support academic and professional growth, share findings, demonstrate knowledge and competence, and encourage lifelong learning (Wankhade, 2018). Moreover, such a work is one of the types of papers where scholars analyze questions or topics, look for secondary sources, and write papers on defined themes. For example, if an assignment is to write about some causes of global warming or any other topic, a person must write a research proposal on it, analyzing important points and credible sources (Goodson, 2024). Although essays focus on personal knowledge, writing a scholarly document means analyzing sources by following academic standards. In turn, scientists must meet the strict structure of research papers (Busse & August, 2020). As such, writers need to analyze their topics, start to search for sources, cover key aspects, process credible articles, and organize final studies properly. However, a research paper’s length can vary significantly depending on its academic level and purpose.

• Length: Typically 2-10 pages.
• Word Count: Approximately 500-2,500 words.
• Length: Usually 10-30 pages.
• Word Count: Around 2,500-7,500 words.
• Length: Master’s theses are generally 40-80 pages, while doctoral dissertations can be 100-300 pages or more.
• Word Count: Master’s theses are typically 10,000-20,000 words, and doctoral dissertations can range from 20,000-100,000 words, depending on the discipline and complexity.
• Length: Generally 8-12 pages for short articles, but review articles and comprehensive studies can be longer.
• Word Count: Approximately 3,000-8,000 words.
• Length: Usually 5-10 pages.
• Word Count: Around 2,000-4,000 words.
• Length: Typically 6-12 pages.
• Word Count: Approximately 2,500-6,000 words.
• Length: Varies widely, often 20-100 pages.
• Word Count: Around 5,000-30,000 words.
• Length: Generally 5-15 pages.
• Word Count: Approximately 2,000-5,000 words.
• Length: Varies, usually 20-40 pages per chapter.
• Word Count: Around 5,000-10,000 words.
• Length: Typically 100-300 pages.
• Word Count: Approximately 30,000-100,000 words.

Research Characteristics

Any type of work must meet some standards. By considering a research paper, this work must be written accordingly. In this case, their main characteristics are the length, style, format, and sources (Graham & McCoy, 2014). Firstly, the study’s length defines the number of needed sources to be analyzed. Then, the style must be formal and cover impersonal and inclusive language (Graham & McCoy, 2014). Moreover, the format means academic standards of how to organize final works, including its structure and norms. Finally, sources and their number define works as research papers because of the volume of analyzed information (Graham & McCoy, 2014). Hence, these characteristics must be considered while writing scholarly documents. In turn, general formatting guidelines are:

• Use a standard font (e.g., Times New Roman, 12-point).
• Double-space the text.
• Include 1-inch margins on all sides.
• Indent the first line of each paragraph.
• Number all pages consecutively, usually in the upper right corner.

Types of Research Papers

In general, the length of assignments can be different because of instructions. For example, there are two main types of research papers, such as typical and serious works. Firstly, a typical research paper may include definitive, argumentative, interpretive, and other works (Goodson, 2024). In this case, typical papers are from 2 to 10 pages, where students analyze study questions or specific topics. Then, a serious research composition is the expanded version of typical works. In turn, the length of such a paper is more than 10 pages (Wankhade, 2018). Basically, such works cover a serious analysis with many sources. Therefore, typical and serious works are two types that scholars should consider when writing their documents.

Typical Research Works

Basically, typical research works depend on assignments, the number of sources, and the paper’s length. So, this composition is usually a long essay with the analyzed evidence. For example, students in high school and college get such assignments to learn how to research and analyze topics (Goodson, 2024). In this case, they do not need to conduct serious experiments with the analysis and calculation of data. Moreover, students must use the Internet or libraries in searching for credible secondary sources to find potential answers to specific questions. As a result, students gather information on topics and learn how to take defined sides, present unique positions, or explain new directions (Goodson, 2024). Hence, they require an analysis of primary and secondary sources without serious experiments or data.

Serious Research Studies

Although long papers require a lot of time for finding and analyzing credible sources, real experiments are an integral part of research work. Firstly, scholars at universities need to analyze the information from past studies to expand or disapprove of topics (Wankhade, 2018). Then, if scholars want to prove specific positions or ideas, they must get real evidence. In this case, experiments can be surveys, calculations, or other types of data that scholars do personally. Moreover, a dissertation is a serious research paper that young scientists write based on the analysis of topics, data from conducted experiments, and conclusions at the end of work (Wankhade, 2018). Thus, they are studies that take a lot of time, analysis of sources with gained data, and interpretation of results.

The structure and format of research papers depend on assignment requirements. In fact, when students get their assignments and instructions, they need to analyze specific research questions or topics, find reliable sources, and write final works. Basically, their structure and format consist of the abstract, outline, introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, recommendations, limitations, conclusion, acknowledgments, and references (Graham & McCoy, 2014). However, students may not include some of these sections because of assigned instructions that they have and specific types they must follow. For instance, if instructions are not supposed to conduct real experiments, the methodology section can be skipped because of the data’s absence. In turn, the structure of the final work consists of:

Join our satisfied customers who have received perfect papers from Wr1ter Team.

🔸 The First Part of a Research Study

Abstract or Executive Summary means the first section of a research paper that provides the study’s purpose, its questions or suggestions, and main findings with conclusions. Moreover, this paragraph of about 150 words should be written when the whole work is finished already (Graham & McCoy, 2014). Hence, abstract sections should describe key aspects of studies, including discussions about the relevance of findings.

Outline or Table of Contents serves as a clear map of the structure of a study.

Introduction provides the main information on problem statements, the indication of methodology, important findings, and principal conclusion. Basically, this section covers rationales behind the work or background research, explanation of the importance, defending its relevance, a brief description of experimental designs, defined study questions, hypotheses, or key aspects (Busse & August, 2020). Hence, scholars should provide a short overview of their studies.

🔸 Literature Review and Research or Experiment

Literature Review is needed for the analysis of past studies or scholarly articles to be familiar with research questions or topics. For example, this section summarizes and synthesizes arguments and ideas from scholarly sources without adding new contributions (Scholz, 2022). In turn, this part is organized around arguments or ideas, not sources.

Methodology or Materials and Methods covers explanations of research designs. Basically, techniques for gathering information and other aspects related to experiments must be described in a research paper. For instance, students and scholars document all specialized materials and general procedures (Turbek et al., 2016). In this case, individuals may use some or all of the methods in further studies or judge the scientific merit of the work. Moreover, scientists should explain how they are going to conduct their experiments.

Results mean the gained information or data after the study or experiment. Basically, scholars should present and illustrate their findings (Turbek et al., 2016). Moreover, this section may include tables or figures.

🔸 Analysis of Findings

Discussion is a section where scientists review the information in the introduction part, evaluate gained results, or compare it with past studies. In particular, students and scholars interpret gained data or findings in appropriate depth. For example, if results differ from expectations at the beginning, scientists should explain why that may have happened (Turbek et al., 2016). However, if results agree with rationales, scientists should describe theories that the evidence is supported.

Recommendations take their roots from a discussion section where scholars propose potential solutions or new ideas based on obtained results. In this case, if scientists have any recommendations on how to improve this research so that other scholars can use evidence in further studies, they must write what they think in this section (Graham & McCoy, 2014). Besides, authors can provide their suggestions for further investigation after their evaluations.

Limitations mean a consideration of research weaknesses and results to get new directions. For instance, if scholars find any limitations in their studies that may affect experiments, scholars must not use such knowledge because of the same mistakes (Busse & August, 2020). Moreover, scientists should avoid contradicting results, and, even more, they must write them in this section.

🔸 The Final Part of a Conducted Research

Conclusion includes final claims of a research paper based on findings. Basically, this section covers final thoughts and the summary of the whole work. Moreover, this section may be used instead of limitations and recommendations that would be too small by themselves (Wankhade, 2018). In this case, scientists do not need to use headings as recommendations and limitations.

Acknowledgments or Appendix may take different forms, from paragraphs to charts. In this section, scholars include additional information about what they did.

References mean a section where students, scholars, or scientists provide all used sources by following the format and academic rules.

How to Write a Research Paper in 7 Steps

Writing any research paper requires following a systematic process. Firstly, writers need to select a focused topic they want to analyze. To achieve this objective, comprehensive preliminary research must be conducted to gather credible and relevant sources (Scholz, 2022). After reviewing the existing literature, writers must develop a clear and concise thesis statement sentence to guide the direction of their studies. Then, organizing the main arguments and evidence into a detailed outline ensures a coherent structure. In turn, the initial draft should be started with a compelling introduction, proceeded with body paragraphs that substantiate the thesis through analysis, and ended with a conclusion that underscores the study’s importance (Turbek et al., 2016). Basically, concluding the work by summarizing the findings and emphasizing the significance of the study is crucial. Moreover, revising and editing for content, coherence, and clarity ensures quality (Busse & August, 2020). Finally, proofreading for grammatical accuracy and ensuring adherence to the required formatting guidelines is necessary before submitting the final paper. Hence, when starting a research paper, writers should do the next:

Step 1: Choose a Topic

• Select a Broad Subject: Begin by identifying a specific subject or theme of interest.
• Narrow Down Your Topic: Focus on a specific aspect of the subject or theme to make your examination more focused.
• Establish the Background: Do a preliminary analysis of sources to ensure there is enough information available and refine your topic further.
• Formulate a Research Question : Create a first draft of a clear, concise research question or thesis statement to guide your study.

Step 2: Conduct Preliminary Analysis

• Gather Credible Sources: Use books, academic journals, scholarly articles, reputable websites, and other primary and secondary sources.
• Choose Only Relevant Sources: Review chosen sources for their content and pick only relevant ones.
• Take Notes: Organize your notes, highlighting key points and evidence and how they relate to your initial thesis.
• Create an Annotated Bibliography: Summarize each source in one paragraph and note how it will contribute to your paper.

Step 3: Develop a Working Thesis Statement

• Be Specific: Revise your initial thesis, making it a working one, outlining the main argument or position of your paper.
• Make It Debatable: Ensure that your working thesis presents a viewpoint that others might challenge or debate.
• Be Concise: Write your working thesis statement in one or two sentences.
• Stay Focused: Your working thesis must be focused and specific.

Step 4: Create an Outline

• Beginning: Outline your opening paragraph, including your working thesis statement.
• Middle Sections : Separate your body into sections with headings for each main point or argument and include sub-points and supporting evidence.
• Ending: Plan your concluding section to summarize your findings and restate your thesis in the light of the evidence presented.
• The List of Sources: Finish your outline by providing citation entries of your sources.

Step 5: Write the First Draft

• Introduction: Start with an engaging opening, provide background information, and state your thesis.
• Body Section: Each body paragraph should focus on a single idea and start with a specific topic sentence, followed by evidence and analysis that supports your thesis.
• Conclusion: Summarize your arguments, restate the importance of your topic, and suggest further investigation, analysis, examination, or possible implications.
• Reference Page: Include the list of references used in your first draft.

Step 6: Revise and Edit

• Content Review: Check for clarity, coherence, and whether each part supports your thesis.
• Structure and Flow: Ensure logical flow of ideas between sections and paragraphs.
• Grammar and Style: Correct grammatical errors, improve sentence structure, and refine your writing style.
• Citations: Ensure all sources are correctly cited in your chosen citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard, etc.).

Step 7: Finalize Your Paper

• Proofread: Carefully proofread for any remaining errors or typos.
• Format: Ensure your paper adheres to the required format, including title page, headers, font, and margins.
• Reference List: Double-check your bibliography, reference, or works cited page for accuracy.
• Submit: Make sure to submit your paper by the deadline.

In conclusion, a research paper is a formal academic document designed to provide a detailed analysis, interpretation, or argument based on in-depth study. Its structured format includes providing opening components, such as the abstract, outline, and introduction; study aspects, such as literature review, methodology, and results; analysis of findings, such as discussion, recommendations, and limitations; and final parts, such as conclusion, acknowledgments, appendices, and references. Understanding the essential elements and adhering to academic standards ensures the creation of a well-organized and meaningful research paper.

Busse, C., & August, E. (2020). How to write and publish a research paper for a peer-reviewed journal. Journal of Cancer Education , 36 (5), 909–913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Goodson, P. (2024). Becoming an academic writer: 50 exercises for paced, productive, and powerful writing . Sage.

Graham, L., & McCoy, I. (2014). How to write a great research paper: A step-by-step handbook. Incentive Publications by World Book.

Scholz, F. (2022). Writing and publishing a scientific paper. ChemTexts , 8 (1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40828-022-00160-7

Turbek, S. P., Chock, T. M., Donahue, K., Havrilla, C. A., Oliverio, A. M., Polutchko, S. K., Shoemaker, L. G., & Vimercati, L. (2016). Scientific writing made easy: A step‐by‐step guide to undergraduate writing in the Biological Sciences. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America , 97 (4), 417–426. https://doi.org/10.1002/bes2.1258

Wankhade, L. (2018). How to write and publish a research paper: A complete guide to writing and publishing a research paper . Independent Published.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to ChatBot Assistant
• Academic Writing

What is a Research Paper?

• Steps in Writing a Research Paper
• Critical Reading and Writing
• Punctuation
• Writing Exercises
• ELL/ESL Resources

"Research paper." What image comes into mind as you hear those words: working with stacks of articles and books, hunting the "treasure" of others' thoughts? Whatever image you create, it's a sure bet that you're envisioning sources of information--articles, books, people, artworks. Yet a research paper is more than the sum of your sources, more than a collection of different pieces of information about a topic, and more than a review of the literature in a field. A research paper analyzes a perspective argues a point . Regardless of the type of research paper you are writing, your finished research paper should present your own thinking backed up by others' ideas and information.

To draw a parallel, a lawyer researches and reads about many cases and uses them to support his or her own case. A scientist reads many case studies to support an idea about a scientific principle. In the same way, a history student writing about the Vietnam War might read newspaper articles and books and interview veterans to develop and/or confirm a viewpoint and support it with evidence.

A research paper is an expanded essay that presents your own interpretation or evaluation or argument. When you write an essay, you use everything that you personally know and have thought about a subject. When you write a research paper you build upon what you know about the subject and make a deliberate attempt to find out what experts know. A research paper involves surveying a field of knowledge in order to find the best possible information in that field. And that survey can be orderly and focused, if you know how to approach it. Don't worry--you won't get lost in a sea of sources.

In fact, this guide is designed to help you navigate the research voyage, through developing a research question and thesis, doing the research, writing the paper, and correctly documenting your sources.

Need Assistance?

If you would like assistance with any type of writing assignment, learning coaches are available to assist you. Please contact Academic Support by emailing [email protected].

Questions or feedback about SUNY Empire's Writing Support?

Contact us at [email protected] .

Smart Cookies

They're not just in our classes – they help power our website. Cookies and similar tools allow us to better understand the experience of our visitors. By continuing to use this website, you consent to SUNY Empire State University's usage of cookies and similar technologies in accordance with the university's Privacy Notice and Cookies Policy .

What Is Research, and Why Do People Do It?

• Open Access
• First Online: 03 December 2022

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• James Hiebert 6 ,
• Jinfa Cai 7 ,
• Stephen Hwang 7 ,
• Anne K Morris 6 &
• Charles Hohensee 6  

Part of the book series: Research in Mathematics Education ((RME))

22k Accesses

Abstractspiepr Abs1

Every day people do research as they gather information to learn about something of interest. In the scientific world, however, research means something different than simply gathering information. Scientific research is characterized by its careful planning and observing, by its relentless efforts to understand and explain, and by its commitment to learn from everyone else seriously engaged in research. We call this kind of research scientific inquiry and define it as “formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses.” By “hypotheses” we do not mean the hypotheses you encounter in statistics courses. We mean predictions about what you expect to find and rationales for why you made these predictions. Throughout this and the remaining chapters we make clear that the process of scientific inquiry applies to all kinds of research studies and data, both qualitative and quantitative.

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

Part I. What Is Research?

Have you ever studied something carefully because you wanted to know more about it? Maybe you wanted to know more about your grandmother’s life when she was younger so you asked her to tell you stories from her childhood, or maybe you wanted to know more about a fertilizer you were about to use in your garden so you read the ingredients on the package and looked them up online. According to the dictionary definition, you were doing research.

Recall your high school assignments asking you to “research” a topic. The assignment likely included consulting a variety of sources that discussed the topic, perhaps including some “original” sources. Often, the teacher referred to your product as a “research paper.”

Were you conducting research when you interviewed your grandmother or wrote high school papers reviewing a particular topic? Our view is that you were engaged in part of the research process, but only a small part. In this book, we reserve the word “research” for what it means in the scientific world, that is, for scientific research or, more pointedly, for scientific inquiry .

Exercise 1.1

Before you read any further, write a definition of what you think scientific inquiry is. Keep it short—Two to three sentences. You will periodically update this definition as you read this chapter and the remainder of the book.

This book is about scientific inquiry—what it is and how to do it. For starters, scientific inquiry is a process, a particular way of finding out about something that involves a number of phases. Each phase of the process constitutes one aspect of scientific inquiry. You are doing scientific inquiry as you engage in each phase, but you have not done scientific inquiry until you complete the full process. Each phase is necessary but not sufficient.

In this chapter, we set the stage by defining scientific inquiry—describing what it is and what it is not—and by discussing what it is good for and why people do it. The remaining chapters build directly on the ideas presented in this chapter.

A first thing to know is that scientific inquiry is not all or nothing. “Scientificness” is a continuum. Inquiries can be more scientific or less scientific. What makes an inquiry more scientific? You might be surprised there is no universally agreed upon answer to this question. None of the descriptors we know of are sufficient by themselves to define scientific inquiry. But all of them give you a way of thinking about some aspects of the process of scientific inquiry. Each one gives you different insights.

Exercise 1.2

As you read about each descriptor below, think about what would make an inquiry more or less scientific. If you think a descriptor is important, use it to revise your definition of scientific inquiry.

Creating an Image of Scientific Inquiry

We will present three descriptors of scientific inquiry. Each provides a different perspective and emphasizes a different aspect of scientific inquiry. We will draw on all three descriptors to compose our definition of scientific inquiry.

Descriptor 1. Experience Carefully Planned in Advance

Sir Ronald Fisher, often called the father of modern statistical design, once referred to research as “experience carefully planned in advance” (1935, p. 8). He said that humans are always learning from experience, from interacting with the world around them. Usually, this learning is haphazard rather than the result of a deliberate process carried out over an extended period of time. Research, Fisher said, was learning from experience, but experience carefully planned in advance.

This phrase can be fully appreciated by looking at each word. The fact that scientific inquiry is based on experience means that it is based on interacting with the world. These interactions could be thought of as the stuff of scientific inquiry. In addition, it is not just any experience that counts. The experience must be carefully planned . The interactions with the world must be conducted with an explicit, describable purpose, and steps must be taken to make the intended learning as likely as possible. This planning is an integral part of scientific inquiry; it is not just a preparation phase. It is one of the things that distinguishes scientific inquiry from many everyday learning experiences. Finally, these steps must be taken beforehand and the purpose of the inquiry must be articulated in advance of the experience. Clearly, scientific inquiry does not happen by accident, by just stumbling into something. Stumbling into something unexpected and interesting can happen while engaged in scientific inquiry, but learning does not depend on it and serendipity does not make the inquiry scientific.

Descriptor 2. Observing Something and Trying to Explain Why It Is the Way It Is

When we were writing this chapter and googled “scientific inquiry,” the first entry was: “Scientific inquiry refers to the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and propose explanations based on the evidence derived from their work.” The emphasis is on studying, or observing, and then explaining . This descriptor takes the image of scientific inquiry beyond carefully planned experience and includes explaining what was experienced.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, “explain” means “(a) to make known, (b) to make plain or understandable, (c) to give the reason or cause of, and (d) to show the logical development or relations of” (Merriam-Webster, n.d. ). We will use all these definitions. Taken together, they suggest that to explain an observation means to understand it by finding reasons (or causes) for why it is as it is. In this sense of scientific inquiry, the following are synonyms: explaining why, understanding why, and reasoning about causes and effects. Our image of scientific inquiry now includes planning, observing, and explaining why.

We need to add a final note about this descriptor. We have phrased it in a way that suggests “observing something” means you are observing something in real time—observing the way things are or the way things are changing. This is often true. But, observing could mean observing data that already have been collected, maybe by someone else making the original observations (e.g., secondary analysis of NAEP data or analysis of existing video recordings of classroom instruction). We will address secondary analyses more fully in Chap. 4 . For now, what is important is that the process requires explaining why the data look like they do.

We must note that for us, the term “data” is not limited to numerical or quantitative data such as test scores. Data can also take many nonquantitative forms, including written survey responses, interview transcripts, journal entries, video recordings of students, teachers, and classrooms, text messages, and so forth.

Exercise 1.3

What are the implications of the statement that just “observing” is not enough to count as scientific inquiry? Does this mean that a detailed description of a phenomenon is not scientific inquiry?

Find sources that define research in education that differ with our position, that say description alone, without explanation, counts as scientific research. Identify the precise points where the opinions differ. What are the best arguments for each of the positions? Which do you prefer? Why?

Descriptor 3. Updating Everyone’s Thinking in Response to More and Better Information

This descriptor focuses on a third aspect of scientific inquiry: updating and advancing the field’s understanding of phenomena that are investigated. This descriptor foregrounds a powerful characteristic of scientific inquiry: the reliability (or trustworthiness) of what is learned and the ultimate inevitability of this learning to advance human understanding of phenomena. Humans might choose not to learn from scientific inquiry, but history suggests that scientific inquiry always has the potential to advance understanding and that, eventually, humans take advantage of these new understandings.

Before exploring these bold claims a bit further, note that this descriptor uses “information” in the same way the previous two descriptors used “experience” and “observations.” These are the stuff of scientific inquiry and we will use them often, sometimes interchangeably. Frequently, we will use the term “data” to stand for all these terms.

An overriding goal of scientific inquiry is for everyone to learn from what one scientist does. Much of this book is about the methods you need to use so others have faith in what you report and can learn the same things you learned. This aspect of scientific inquiry has many implications.

One implication is that scientific inquiry is not a private practice. It is a public practice available for others to see and learn from. Notice how different this is from everyday learning. When you happen to learn something from your everyday experience, often only you gain from the experience. The fact that research is a public practice means it is also a social one. It is best conducted by interacting with others along the way: soliciting feedback at each phase, taking opportunities to present work-in-progress, and benefitting from the advice of others.

A second implication is that you, as the researcher, must be committed to sharing what you are doing and what you are learning in an open and transparent way. This allows all phases of your work to be scrutinized and critiqued. This is what gives your work credibility. The reliability or trustworthiness of your findings depends on your colleagues recognizing that you have used all appropriate methods to maximize the chances that your claims are justified by the data.

A third implication of viewing scientific inquiry as a collective enterprise is the reverse of the second—you must be committed to receiving comments from others. You must treat your colleagues as fair and honest critics even though it might sometimes feel otherwise. You must appreciate their job, which is to remain skeptical while scrutinizing what you have done in considerable detail. To provide the best help to you, they must remain skeptical about your conclusions (when, for example, the data are difficult for them to interpret) until you offer a convincing logical argument based on the information you share. A rather harsh but good-to-remember statement of the role of your friendly critics was voiced by Karl Popper, a well-known twentieth century philosopher of science: “. . . if you are interested in the problem which I tried to solve by my tentative assertion, you may help me by criticizing it as severely as you can” (Popper, 1968, p. 27).

A final implication of this third descriptor is that, as someone engaged in scientific inquiry, you have no choice but to update your thinking when the data support a different conclusion. This applies to your own data as well as to those of others. When data clearly point to a specific claim, even one that is quite different than you expected, you must reconsider your position. If the outcome is replicated multiple times, you need to adjust your thinking accordingly. Scientific inquiry does not let you pick and choose which data to believe; it mandates that everyone update their thinking when the data warrant an update.

Doing Scientific Inquiry

We define scientific inquiry in an operational sense—what does it mean to do scientific inquiry? What kind of process would satisfy all three descriptors: carefully planning an experience in advance; observing and trying to explain what you see; and, contributing to updating everyone’s thinking about an important phenomenon?

We define scientific inquiry as formulating , testing , and revising hypotheses about phenomena of interest.

Of course, we are not the only ones who define it in this way. The definition for the scientific method posted by the editors of Britannica is: “a researcher develops a hypothesis, tests it through various means, and then modifies the hypothesis on the basis of the outcome of the tests and experiments” (Britannica, n.d. ).

Notice how defining scientific inquiry this way satisfies each of the descriptors. “Carefully planning an experience in advance” is exactly what happens when formulating a hypothesis about a phenomenon of interest and thinking about how to test it. “ Observing a phenomenon” occurs when testing a hypothesis, and “ explaining ” what is found is required when revising a hypothesis based on the data. Finally, “updating everyone’s thinking” comes from comparing publicly the original with the revised hypothesis.

Doing scientific inquiry, as we have defined it, underscores the value of accumulating knowledge rather than generating random bits of knowledge. Formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses is an ongoing process, with each revised hypothesis begging for another test, whether by the same researcher or by new researchers. The editors of Britannica signaled this cyclic process by adding the following phrase to their definition of the scientific method: “The modified hypothesis is then retested, further modified, and tested again.” Scientific inquiry creates a process that encourages each study to build on the studies that have gone before. Through collective engagement in this process of building study on top of study, the scientific community works together to update its thinking.

Before exploring more fully the meaning of “formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses,” we need to acknowledge that this is not the only way researchers define research. Some researchers prefer a less formal definition, one that includes more serendipity, less planning, less explanation. You might have come across more open definitions such as “research is finding out about something.” We prefer the tighter hypothesis formulation, testing, and revision definition because we believe it provides a single, coherent map for conducting research that addresses many of the thorny problems educational researchers encounter. We believe it is the most useful orientation toward research and the most helpful to learn as a beginning researcher.

A final clarification of our definition is that it applies equally to qualitative and quantitative research. This is a familiar distinction in education that has generated much discussion. You might think our definition favors quantitative methods over qualitative methods because the language of hypothesis formulation and testing is often associated with quantitative methods. In fact, we do not favor one method over another. In Chap. 4 , we will illustrate how our definition fits research using a range of quantitative and qualitative methods.

Exercise 1.4

Look for ways to extend what the field knows in an area that has already received attention by other researchers. Specifically, you can search for a program of research carried out by more experienced researchers that has some revised hypotheses that remain untested. Identify a revised hypothesis that you might like to test.

Unpacking the Terms Formulating, Testing, and Revising Hypotheses

To get a full sense of the definition of scientific inquiry we will use throughout this book, it is helpful to spend a little time with each of the key terms.

We first want to make clear that we use the term “hypothesis” as it is defined in most dictionaries and as it used in many scientific fields rather than as it is usually defined in educational statistics courses. By “hypothesis,” we do not mean a null hypothesis that is accepted or rejected by statistical analysis. Rather, we use “hypothesis” in the sense conveyed by the following definitions: “An idea or explanation for something that is based on known facts but has not yet been proved” (Cambridge University Press, n.d. ), and “An unproved theory, proposition, or supposition, tentatively accepted to explain certain facts and to provide a basis for further investigation or argument” (Agnes & Guralnik, 2008 ).

We distinguish two parts to “hypotheses.” Hypotheses consist of predictions and rationales . Predictions are statements about what you expect to find when you inquire about something. Rationales are explanations for why you made the predictions you did, why you believe your predictions are correct. So, for us “formulating hypotheses” means making explicit predictions and developing rationales for the predictions.

“Testing hypotheses” means making observations that allow you to assess in what ways your predictions were correct and in what ways they were incorrect. In education research, it is rarely useful to think of your predictions as either right or wrong. Because of the complexity of most issues you will investigate, most predictions will be right in some ways and wrong in others.

By studying the observations you make (data you collect) to test your hypotheses, you can revise your hypotheses to better align with the observations. This means revising your predictions plus revising your rationales to justify your adjusted predictions. Even though you might not run another test, formulating revised hypotheses is an essential part of conducting a research study. Comparing your original and revised hypotheses informs everyone of what you learned by conducting your study. In addition, a revised hypothesis sets the stage for you or someone else to extend your study and accumulate more knowledge of the phenomenon.

We should note that not everyone makes a clear distinction between predictions and rationales as two aspects of hypotheses. In fact, common, non-scientific uses of the word “hypothesis” may limit it to only a prediction or only an explanation (or rationale). We choose to explicitly include both prediction and rationale in our definition of hypothesis, not because we assert this should be the universal definition, but because we want to foreground the importance of both parts acting in concert. Using “hypothesis” to represent both prediction and rationale could hide the two aspects, but we make them explicit because they provide different kinds of information. It is usually easier to make predictions than develop rationales because predictions can be guesses, hunches, or gut feelings about which you have little confidence. Developing a compelling rationale requires careful thought plus reading what other researchers have found plus talking with your colleagues. Often, while you are developing your rationale you will find good reasons to change your predictions. Developing good rationales is the engine that drives scientific inquiry. Rationales are essentially descriptions of how much you know about the phenomenon you are studying. Throughout this guide, we will elaborate on how developing good rationales drives scientific inquiry. For now, we simply note that it can sharpen your predictions and help you to interpret your data as you test your hypotheses.

Hypotheses in education research take a variety of forms or types. This is because there are a variety of phenomena that can be investigated. Investigating educational phenomena is sometimes best done using qualitative methods, sometimes using quantitative methods, and most often using mixed methods (e.g., Hay, 2016 ; Weis et al. 2019a ; Weisner, 2005 ). This means that, given our definition, hypotheses are equally applicable to qualitative and quantitative investigations.

Hypotheses take different forms when they are used to investigate different kinds of phenomena. Two very different activities in education could be labeled conducting experiments and descriptions. In an experiment, a hypothesis makes a prediction about anticipated changes, say the changes that occur when a treatment or intervention is applied. You might investigate how students’ thinking changes during a particular kind of instruction.

A second type of hypothesis, relevant for descriptive research, makes a prediction about what you will find when you investigate and describe the nature of a situation. The goal is to understand a situation as it exists rather than to understand a change from one situation to another. In this case, your prediction is what you expect to observe. Your rationale is the set of reasons for making this prediction; it is your current explanation for why the situation will look like it does.

You will probably read, if you have not already, that some researchers say you do not need a prediction to conduct a descriptive study. We will discuss this point of view in Chap. 2 . For now, we simply claim that scientific inquiry, as we have defined it, applies to all kinds of research studies. Descriptive studies, like others, not only benefit from formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses, but also need hypothesis formulating, testing, and revising.

One reason we define research as formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses is that if you think of research in this way you are less likely to go wrong. It is a useful guide for the entire process, as we will describe in detail in the chapters ahead. For example, as you build the rationale for your predictions, you are constructing the theoretical framework for your study (Chap. 3 ). As you work out the methods you will use to test your hypothesis, every decision you make will be based on asking, “Will this help me formulate or test or revise my hypothesis?” (Chap. 4 ). As you interpret the results of testing your predictions, you will compare them to what you predicted and examine the differences, focusing on how you must revise your hypotheses (Chap. 5 ). By anchoring the process to formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses, you will make smart decisions that yield a coherent and well-designed study.

Exercise 1.5

Compare the concept of formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses with the descriptions of scientific inquiry contained in Scientific Research in Education (NRC, 2002 ). How are they similar or different?

Exercise 1.6

Provide an example to illustrate and emphasize the differences between everyday learning/thinking and scientific inquiry.

Learning from Doing Scientific Inquiry

We noted earlier that a measure of what you have learned by conducting a research study is found in the differences between your original hypothesis and your revised hypothesis based on the data you collected to test your hypothesis. We will elaborate this statement in later chapters, but we preview our argument here.

Even before collecting data, scientific inquiry requires cycles of making a prediction, developing a rationale, refining your predictions, reading and studying more to strengthen your rationale, refining your predictions again, and so forth. And, even if you have run through several such cycles, you still will likely find that when you test your prediction you will be partly right and partly wrong. The results will support some parts of your predictions but not others, or the results will “kind of” support your predictions. A critical part of scientific inquiry is making sense of your results by interpreting them against your predictions. Carefully describing what aspects of your data supported your predictions, what aspects did not, and what data fell outside of any predictions is not an easy task, but you cannot learn from your study without doing this analysis.

Analyzing the matches and mismatches between your predictions and your data allows you to formulate different rationales that would have accounted for more of the data. The best revised rationale is the one that accounts for the most data. Once you have revised your rationales, you can think about the predictions they best justify or explain. It is by comparing your original rationales to your new rationales that you can sort out what you learned from your study.

Suppose your study was an experiment. Maybe you were investigating the effects of a new instructional intervention on students’ learning. Your original rationale was your explanation for why the intervention would change the learning outcomes in a particular way. Your revised rationale explained why the changes that you observed occurred like they did and why your revised predictions are better. Maybe your original rationale focused on the potential of the activities if they were implemented in ideal ways and your revised rationale included the factors that are likely to affect how teachers implement them. By comparing the before and after rationales, you are describing what you learned—what you can explain now that you could not before. Another way of saying this is that you are describing how much more you understand now than before you conducted your study.

Revised predictions based on carefully planned and collected data usually exhibit some of the following features compared with the originals: more precision, more completeness, and broader scope. Revised rationales have more explanatory power and become more complete, more aligned with the new predictions, sharper, and overall more convincing.

Part II. Why Do Educators Do Research?

Doing scientific inquiry is a lot of work. Each phase of the process takes time, and you will often cycle back to improve earlier phases as you engage in later phases. Because of the significant effort required, you should make sure your study is worth it. So, from the beginning, you should think about the purpose of your study. Why do you want to do it? And, because research is a social practice, you should also think about whether the results of your study are likely to be important and significant to the education community.

If you are doing research in the way we have described—as scientific inquiry—then one purpose of your study is to understand , not just to describe or evaluate or report. As we noted earlier, when you formulate hypotheses, you are developing rationales that explain why things might be like they are. In our view, trying to understand and explain is what separates research from other kinds of activities, like evaluating or describing.

One reason understanding is so important is that it allows researchers to see how or why something works like it does. When you see how something works, you are better able to predict how it might work in other contexts, under other conditions. And, because conditions, or contextual factors, matter a lot in education, gaining insights into applying your findings to other contexts increases the contributions of your work and its importance to the broader education community.

Consequently, the purposes of research studies in education often include the more specific aim of identifying and understanding the conditions under which the phenomena being studied work like the observations suggest. A classic example of this kind of study in mathematics education was reported by William Brownell and Harold Moser in 1949 . They were trying to establish which method of subtracting whole numbers could be taught most effectively—the regrouping method or the equal additions method. However, they realized that effectiveness might depend on the conditions under which the methods were taught—“meaningfully” versus “mechanically.” So, they designed a study that crossed the two instructional approaches with the two different methods (regrouping and equal additions). Among other results, they found that these conditions did matter. The regrouping method was more effective under the meaningful condition than the mechanical condition, but the same was not true for the equal additions algorithm.

What do education researchers want to understand? In our view, the ultimate goal of education is to offer all students the best possible learning opportunities. So, we believe the ultimate purpose of scientific inquiry in education is to develop understanding that supports the improvement of learning opportunities for all students. We say “ultimate” because there are lots of issues that must be understood to improve learning opportunities for all students. Hypotheses about many aspects of education are connected, ultimately, to students’ learning. For example, formulating and testing a hypothesis that preservice teachers need to engage in particular kinds of activities in their coursework in order to teach particular topics well is, ultimately, connected to improving students’ learning opportunities. So is hypothesizing that school districts often devote relatively few resources to instructional leadership training or hypothesizing that positioning mathematics as a tool students can use to combat social injustice can help students see the relevance of mathematics to their lives.

We do not exclude the importance of research on educational issues more removed from improving students’ learning opportunities, but we do think the argument for their importance will be more difficult to make. If there is no way to imagine a connection between your hypothesis and improving learning opportunities for students, even a distant connection, we recommend you reconsider whether it is an important hypothesis within the education community.

Notice that we said the ultimate goal of education is to offer all students the best possible learning opportunities. For too long, educators have been satisfied with a goal of offering rich learning opportunities for lots of students, sometimes even for just the majority of students, but not necessarily for all students. Evaluations of success often are based on outcomes that show high averages. In other words, if many students have learned something, or even a smaller number have learned a lot, educators may have been satisfied. The problem is that there is usually a pattern in the groups of students who receive lower quality opportunities—students of color and students who live in poor areas, urban and rural. This is not acceptable. Consequently, we emphasize the premise that the purpose of education research is to offer rich learning opportunities to all students.

One way to make sure you will be able to convince others of the importance of your study is to consider investigating some aspect of teachers’ shared instructional problems. Historically, researchers in education have set their own research agendas, regardless of the problems teachers are facing in schools. It is increasingly recognized that teachers have had trouble applying to their own classrooms what researchers find. To address this problem, a researcher could partner with a teacher—better yet, a small group of teachers—and talk with them about instructional problems they all share. These discussions can create a rich pool of problems researchers can consider. If researchers pursued one of these problems (preferably alongside teachers), the connection to improving learning opportunities for all students could be direct and immediate. “Grounding a research question in instructional problems that are experienced across multiple teachers’ classrooms helps to ensure that the answer to the question will be of sufficient scope to be relevant and significant beyond the local context” (Cai et al., 2019b , p. 115).

As a beginning researcher, determining the relevance and importance of a research problem is especially challenging. We recommend talking with advisors, other experienced researchers, and peers to test the educational importance of possible research problems and topics of study. You will also learn much more about the issue of research importance when you read Chap. 5 .

Exercise 1.7

Identify a problem in education that is closely connected to improving learning opportunities and a problem that has a less close connection. For each problem, write a brief argument (like a logical sequence of if-then statements) that connects the problem to all students’ learning opportunities.

Part III. Conducting Research as a Practice of Failing Productively

Scientific inquiry involves formulating hypotheses about phenomena that are not fully understood—by you or anyone else. Even if you are able to inform your hypotheses with lots of knowledge that has already been accumulated, you are likely to find that your prediction is not entirely accurate. This is normal. Remember, scientific inquiry is a process of constantly updating your thinking. More and better information means revising your thinking, again, and again, and again. Because you never fully understand a complicated phenomenon and your hypotheses never produce completely accurate predictions, it is easy to believe you are somehow failing.

The trick is to fail upward, to fail to predict accurately in ways that inform your next hypothesis so you can make a better prediction. Some of the best-known researchers in education have been open and honest about the many times their predictions were wrong and, based on the results of their studies and those of others, they continuously updated their thinking and changed their hypotheses.

A striking example of publicly revising (actually reversing) hypotheses due to incorrect predictions is found in the work of Lee J. Cronbach, one of the most distinguished educational psychologists of the twentieth century. In 1955, Cronbach delivered his presidential address to the American Psychological Association. Titling it “Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology,” Cronbach proposed a rapprochement between two research approaches—correlational studies that focused on individual differences and experimental studies that focused on instructional treatments controlling for individual differences. (We will examine different research approaches in Chap. 4 ). If these approaches could be brought together, reasoned Cronbach ( 1957 ), researchers could find interactions between individual characteristics and treatments (aptitude-treatment interactions or ATIs), fitting the best treatments to different individuals.

In 1975, after years of research by many researchers looking for ATIs, Cronbach acknowledged the evidence for simple, useful ATIs had not been found. Even when trying to find interactions between a few variables that could provide instructional guidance, the analysis, said Cronbach, creates “a hall of mirrors that extends to infinity, tormenting even the boldest investigators and defeating even ambitious designs” (Cronbach, 1975 , p. 119).

As he was reflecting back on his work, Cronbach ( 1986 ) recommended moving away from documenting instructional effects through statistical inference (an approach he had championed for much of his career) and toward approaches that probe the reasons for these effects, approaches that provide a “full account of events in a time, place, and context” (Cronbach, 1986 , p. 104). This is a remarkable change in hypotheses, a change based on data and made fully transparent. Cronbach understood the value of failing productively.

Closer to home, in a less dramatic example, one of us began a line of scientific inquiry into how to prepare elementary preservice teachers to teach early algebra. Teaching early algebra meant engaging elementary students in early forms of algebraic reasoning. Such reasoning should help them transition from arithmetic to algebra. To begin this line of inquiry, a set of activities for preservice teachers were developed. Even though the activities were based on well-supported hypotheses, they largely failed to engage preservice teachers as predicted because of unanticipated challenges the preservice teachers faced. To capitalize on this failure, follow-up studies were conducted, first to better understand elementary preservice teachers’ challenges with preparing to teach early algebra, and then to better support preservice teachers in navigating these challenges. In this example, the initial failure was a necessary step in the researchers’ scientific inquiry and furthered the researchers’ understanding of this issue.

We present another example of failing productively in Chap. 2 . That example emerges from recounting the history of a well-known research program in mathematics education.

Making mistakes is an inherent part of doing scientific research. Conducting a study is rarely a smooth path from beginning to end. We recommend that you keep the following things in mind as you begin a career of conducting research in education.

First, do not get discouraged when you make mistakes; do not fall into the trap of feeling like you are not capable of doing research because you make too many errors.

Second, learn from your mistakes. Do not ignore your mistakes or treat them as errors that you simply need to forget and move past. Mistakes are rich sites for learning—in research just as in other fields of study.

Third, by reflecting on your mistakes, you can learn to make better mistakes, mistakes that inform you about a productive next step. You will not be able to eliminate your mistakes, but you can set a goal of making better and better mistakes.

Exercise 1.8

How does scientific inquiry differ from everyday learning in giving you the tools to fail upward? You may find helpful perspectives on this question in other resources on science and scientific inquiry (e.g., Failure: Why Science is So Successful by Firestein, 2015).

Exercise 1.9

Use what you have learned in this chapter to write a new definition of scientific inquiry. Compare this definition with the one you wrote before reading this chapter. If you are reading this book as part of a course, compare your definition with your colleagues’ definitions. Develop a consensus definition with everyone in the course.

Part IV. Preview of Chap. 2

Now that you have a good idea of what research is, at least of what we believe research is, the next step is to think about how to actually begin doing research. This means how to begin formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses. As for all phases of scientific inquiry, there are lots of things to think about. Because it is critical to start well, we devote Chap. 2 to getting started with formulating hypotheses.

Agnes, M., & Guralnik, D. B. (Eds.). (2008). Hypothesis. In Webster’s new world college dictionary (4th ed.). Wiley.

Google Scholar  

Britannica. (n.d.). Scientific method. In Encyclopaedia Britannica . Retrieved July 15, 2022 from https://www.britannica.com/science/scientific-method

Brownell, W. A., & Moser, H. E. (1949). Meaningful vs. mechanical learning: A study in grade III subtraction . Duke University Press..

Cai, J., Morris, A., Hohensee, C., Hwang, S., Robison, V., Cirillo, M., Kramer, S. L., & Hiebert, J. (2019b). Posing significant research questions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 50 (2), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.50.2.0114

Article   Google Scholar  

Cambridge University Press. (n.d.). Hypothesis. In Cambridge dictionary . Retrieved July 15, 2022 from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/hypothesis

Cronbach, J. L. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12 , 671–684.

Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30 , 116–127.

Cronbach, L. J. (1986). Social inquiry by and for earthlings. In D. W. Fiske & R. A. Shweder (Eds.), Metatheory in social science: Pluralisms and subjectivities (pp. 83–107). University of Chicago Press.

Hay, C. M. (Ed.). (2016). Methods that matter: Integrating mixed methods for more effective social science research . University of Chicago Press.

Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Explain. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary . Retrieved July 15, 2022, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/explain

National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education . National Academy Press.

Weis, L., Eisenhart, M., Duncan, G. J., Albro, E., Bueschel, A. C., Cobb, P., Eccles, J., Mendenhall, R., Moss, P., Penuel, W., Ream, R. K., Rumbaut, R. G., Sloane, F., Weisner, T. S., & Wilson, J. (2019a). Mixed methods for studies that address broad and enduring issues in education research. Teachers College Record, 121 , 100307.

Weisner, T. S. (Ed.). (2005). Discovering successful pathways in children’s development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life . University of Chicago Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Education, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

James Hiebert, Anne K Morris & Charles Hohensee

Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

Jinfa Cai & Stephen Hwang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

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

Hiebert, J., Cai, J., Hwang, S., Morris, A.K., Hohensee, C. (2023). What Is Research, and Why Do People Do It?. In: Doing Research: A New Researcher’s Guide. Research in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19078-0_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19078-0_1

Published : 03 December 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-19077-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-19078-0

eBook Packages : Education Education (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

Reference management. Clean and simple.

Types of research papers

Analytical research paper

Argumentative or persuasive paper, definition paper, compare and contrast paper, cause and effect paper, interpretative paper, experimental research paper, survey research paper, frequently asked questions about the different types of research papers, related articles.

There are multiple different types of research papers. It is important to know which type of research paper is required for your assignment, as each type of research paper requires different preparation. Below is a list of the most common types of research papers.

➡️ Read more:  What is a research paper?

In an analytical research paper you:

• pose a question
• collect relevant data from other researchers
• analyze their different viewpoints

You focus on the findings and conclusions of other researchers and then make a personal conclusion about the topic. It is important to stay neutral and not show your own negative or positive position on the matter.

The argumentative paper presents two sides of a controversial issue in one paper. It is aimed at getting the reader on the side of your point of view.

You should include and cite findings and arguments of different researchers on both sides of the issue, but then favor one side over the other and try to persuade the reader of your side. Your arguments should not be too emotional though, they still need to be supported with logical facts and statistical data.

Tip: Avoid expressing too much emotion in a persuasive paper.

The definition paper solely describes facts or objective arguments without using any personal emotion or opinion of the author. Its only purpose is to provide information. You should include facts from a variety of sources, but leave those facts unanalyzed.

Compare and contrast papers are used to analyze the difference between two:

Make sure to sufficiently describe both sides in the paper, and then move on to comparing and contrasting both thesis and supporting one.

Cause and effect papers are usually the first types of research papers that high school and college students write. They trace probable or expected results from a specific action and answer the main questions "Why?" and "What?", which reflect effects and causes.

In business and education fields, cause and effect papers will help trace a range of results that could arise from a particular action or situation.

An interpretative paper requires you to use knowledge that you have gained from a particular case study, for example a legal situation in law studies. You need to write the paper based on an established theoretical framework and use valid supporting data to back up your statement and conclusion.

This type of research paper basically describes a particular experiment in detail. It is common in fields like:

Experiments are aimed to explain a certain outcome or phenomenon with certain actions. You need to describe your experiment with supporting data and then analyze it sufficiently.

This research paper demands the conduction of a survey that includes asking questions to respondents. The conductor of the survey then collects all the information from the survey and analyzes it to present it in the research paper.

➡️ Ready to start your research paper? Take a look at our guide on how to start a research paper .

In an analytical research paper, you pose a question and then collect relevant data from other researchers to analyze their different viewpoints. You focus on the findings and conclusions of other researchers and then make a personal conclusion about the topic.

The definition paper solely describes facts or objective arguments without using any personal emotion or opinion of the author. Its only purpose is to provide information.

Cause and effect papers are usually the first types of research papers that high school and college students are confronted with. The answer questions like "Why?" and "What?", which reflect effects and causes. In business and education fields, cause and effect papers will help trace a range of results that could arise from a particular action or situation.

This type of research paper describes a particular experiment in detail. It is common in fields like biology, chemistry or physics. Experiments are aimed to explain a certain outcome or phenomenon with certain actions.

Verify originality of an essay

Get ideas for your paper

Cite sources with ease

What Is a Research Paper and How Should You Write One?

Updated 02 Sep 2024

Students face tons of assignments at schools and higher education institutions. Among all the different academic written assignments’ types, research paper writing is often considered to be one of the most challenging and complex. Is it really that stressful and hard to handle? The answer depends not on the subject you are studying, but more on your personal abilities to comprehend your knowledge. What is the goal for such a task, what is a research paper, and how to write it? In this article, our expert writers provide you with the answers.

Defining the Term: What Is a Research Paper Exactly?

A research essay is a large scientific work. The main goal of this project, regardless of the subject, is defining a particular issue and providing new ways to solve it that can be used to further investigate the problem. So, what is the accurate research paper definition? Unlike regular essays, such projects imply thinking out of the box. Here are the major features that distinguish research papers from other academic tasks.

• More extensive in volume than other written assignments.
• Needs extensive investigation on a particular problem.
• Often requires conducting experiments along with further results’ analysis.
• Insights should be based on your own thoughts, as well as experiments.
• Purpose implies finding some novel solutions or approaches.
• Everything should be supported by solid, verifiable evidence.
• Findings should be good enough to serve as a basis for further study.

Basically, if you want to define a research paper, you would be speaking about academic work done completely independently. In such a project, you are supposed to present your own view on things you investigate. This is where students usually face difficulties, so many of them prefer seeking for alternative ways to get cheap custom research papers.

How Does a Research Paper Differ from a Research Proposal?

One should understand the difference between a proposal and a paper before the actual writing process begins, as these are different tasks. As its name implies, a proposal is a rationale for conducting research to be approved by an instructor. It should explain the purpose of future projects and what new aspects of knowledge it brings into the academic studies’ field. A research proposal’s specific structure should explain a methodology that appears to be the most sufficient for its purposes and anticipated outcomes. Unlike a research paper, a proposal must have a more extensive literature review section as it serves as the ground for rationale and ensures originality of suggested topic. You may ask yourself is this ethical to pay someone to write my research paper? The answer is we won't judge you, but instead, we'll provide you reliable help.

Structure of the Research Paper

The general layout usually depends on the requested formatting style and specific instructions. Speaking about what to include in a paper in terms of obligatory sections, one can observe the following parts in any project:

• Research paper introduction

It should include a general background narrowed down to a specific problem under study and explain why you conduct the study. The purpose is embodied in a research question and original main argument. The key idea in this section is to provide a reader with a proper road map and a clear vision of the topic that goes from a broad perspective to a narrow one.

This is the longest part of your text that is essential for good research paper. A previously developed and presented narrow theme should be thoroughly discussed here following standard academic requirements for coherent papers. Each paragraph in this section is a mini-research paper since you first develop a specific claim related to the particular aspect of the main thesis statement, provide evidence gathered during literature search that proves the mentioned claim, present your own interpretation and ability to analyze facts, and, finally, wrap everything up with a concluding sentence that also brings the next point of discussion for subsequent paragraphs.

A general description of all outcomes and a summary of all main points of discussion will help your reader grasp the meaning of the entire paper. This section presupposes careful writing for you not to omit anything important as such drawbacks undermine your hard work’s quality.

These are basic requirements for a perfect academic paper, irrespective of its specific type and content as the readability and coherence of a written paper represent that one honed his or her writing skills. Every instructor highly appreciates these abilities.

Main Types of Research Papers

What is the key to getting the highest assessment? The main things that can help with research paper include understanding the task, its objectives and in-depth knowledge of the chosen topic. There are several common types of this kind of academic work. Each type is widely used in different educational institutions for different disciplines. Thus, understanding their peculiarities is important to grasp how to write a successful research paper:

• Compare and contrast: Describes the same issue from two different perspectives.
• Cause and effect: Should present a logical chain of causes and effects related to the chosen problem or subject.
• Persuasive/Argumentative: Discusses several sides of a particular issue and provides arguments in favor of one chosen side.
• Analytical writing demonstrates your best qualities, as such a task asks you to create a piece with deep analysis of various opinions regarding the same issue.
• Experiment: Students experiment and share their results.
• Report: Outlines previously conducted studies.
• Overview: Focuses on one, usually extensive scholarly study, so that the following tips on  how to write a research summary would be extremely useful.
• Survey: Student conducts a survey among chosen participants, analyzes findings, and develops conclusions.
• Problem-solution: Presents a problem and ways to resolve it.
• Communication research paper: Dedicated to developing one’s ability to produce reasonable arguments.

Usually, all these projects are rather lengthy, so that a 5-page research paper is a minimum requirement in most cases. It is a misconception that instructors demand long writing without a reason as it is impossible to cover complex study areas, including all needed sections, and meeting requirements in just a page or two.

Need more writing assistance?

Connect with our top writers and receive a research paper crafted to your needs.

Layouts, References, and Citations: Stages of Writing a Research Paper

Many first-year students feel quite at a loss about how to start a research paper. The first piece of advice: divide your project into small clear stages to know how to write a research paper step by step.

Stage 1: How to Write an Outline for a Research Paper

Before starting your project, read your guidelines thoroughly. Have a clear understanding of required work’s volume. Remember that division on clear sections is a representative feature of a good paper. Each of the research paper's steps has a purpose.

A typical outline contains:

• A separate title page (Your topic with all requested credentials);
• Abstract (Short summary of your work, no new information here);
• Introduction/Literature review (Presents what was written before in this area);
• Methods section (Describes how exactly your study was conducted and instruments for analysis);
• Results (Obtained during your experiment, analysis, etc.);
• Discussion (Your interpretation of results);
• Conclusion (Summarizing paper);
• References (All used sources listed here);
• Appendixes (Include tables or any other additional information that is needed for more complete understanding).

The above-mentioned parts are usually grouped into bigger sections – for example, methods, results, and discussion are referred to as the body of the completed paper.

Read Also:  Chemistry Research Topics That Will Knock You Off Your Feet

Stage 2: Developing the Perfect Topic

Choosing a perfect topic is crucial. Whether you need History, Physics or  Biology research topics , instructors may provide a list of ready-made problems so you can choose or give freedom to develop your own topic. An idea’s originality and necessity to bring something new in the study area is a key element in definition of research paper. There is an opportunity to come across some knowledge gaps even among  research paper topics  already discussed before by other scholars. In any case, you should think  about  whether a question you want to research is interesting, allows gathering necessary information, and developing a structured argument.

Stage 3: Searching for Sources

Preliminary research is necessary as you need to have a general understanding of a topic under study before looking closely at your own specific aspect so that you know how to set up a research paper. Use information available online, especially on credible websites located on .edu, .gov, .org domains, to find more about background information.

The next step implies gathering good reliable sources to develop a literature review. Rely only on online university libraries and digital databases of scholarly journals and other academic credible sources like JSTOR. Google Scholar search engine is helpful to find publications that are recent and relevant to your research.

Stage 4: Thesis Statement is the Central Point of Structure

In a piece as huge and complex as a research essay, the choice of a study focus is just a start. While reviewing literature you need to keep in mind the main claim and central idea of the paper in progress as well as the answer you expect to find. This claim is expected in the form of a thesis statement and the entire paper should aim at proving it.

Stage 5: Going on a Quest: Researching and Experimenting

That is the most time-consuming part of the project. During this step, you delve into gathered literature, conduct experiments, and analyze obtained results. Remember the initial outline and general structure so that gathered information will be located in the proper sections.

Stage 6: Compose and Write a Paper as Scholars Do

Now you have to write it all down and produce a research paper. Transform your notes into a coherent, logical text that defends your point. Style of such papers is very formal with lots of specific terms. Make sure facts from reliable sources support every statement made in your work.

Stage 7: Formatting, Editing, and Proofreading

What you have written in your first Word document is not a real paper yet – it is just a first draft. Then, you would have to sit down, re-read it multiple times, edit typos and style and format it according to the style requested by the instructor. Remember that typos and formatting mistakes are unacceptable as they undermine even perfectly researched and structured papers. Follow these three steps to ensure effective polishing: read your paper aloud, ask someone else to read it to have a fresh perspective, and use spell check software.

How to Write a Research Paper That Will Be Really Convincing

Analytical skills and the ability to logically expressing one’s thoughts in a formal manner are as crucial in academic writing as knowledge of the study area. Thankfully, there are many ways to optimize the process and finish task properly and on time:

• Plan your work and set deadlines for each part of the assignment. It is easier to focus on small, separate portions day by day than write a paper in a rush before your deadline.
• Discuss your thesis statement with the instructor. Together, you will make the thesis concise and focused on the point you are going to disclose in your writing.
• Think about the intended audience of your research essay before starting to write it: whether it is a general audience that does not know much about the topic or community of scholars. Both writing style and structure of writing differ significantly depending on the audience.
• Always take notes so that all important details are included and nothing is omitted.
• Be careful with sources as all of them must be reliable to give solid evidence.
• Add proper citations with page numbers for all facts that you collect during research. This will help you to avoid wasting time looking over all sources again while formatting the paper.
• You don’t know how to type a research paper? Indeed, the scope of work is immense, so a developing detailed written outline with all main arguments will be extremely helpful in the early writing stages as you keep the whole picture in mind.
• Think about the word count to be allocated to each part. Students often devote a large part of their papers to a background, leaving not enough space for their own analysis, which affects the quality of their argument.
• Do not work completely alone. Work together with your peers and show your first draft to the instructor for useful feedback.
• Leave enough time for final proofreading and formatting of the completed task. Be warned that this process takes more time than you usually expect. Overlooking small mistakes while rushing is plausible.

Checklist: Have I met all requirements of what is a research essay?

• Is my topic focused on discussing something new in my chosen field of study?
• Is there enough information available in this particular field?
• Have I utilized only reliable and academic sources?
• Is it possible to gather evidence and find proper answers to my research question and prove my claim?
• Have I included all the requested components mentioned in the outline? Is the research paper structure clear?
• Did I cite all facts and data taken from outside sources so that any plagiarism issues are effectively prevented?
• Did I summarize all my findings in a concise conclusion?
• Have I polished the paper before submission?

The Importance of Proper Formatting

This aspect of the research paper writing process depends not only on the general educational institution’s requirements or specific instructor’s guidelines but also on the chosen subject and field. Details about formatting demands are the last among research paper tips. The main demand for a student who wants to know how to format a research paper is to follow all features of the chosen style attentively. Do not mix different styles in one paper:

APA : Usually used in Medicine, Psychological and Social sciences;

MLA: Widely used in the Humanities;

Harvard: There is no particular study area that uses only this style, but it occurs more often in Social sciences and the Humanities;

Chicago/Turabian style citation generator is useful for formatting research papers in Business and History studies’ fields;

IEEE: Became standard for specialists in Engineering, Computer, and Information science;

ASA: Required for publications in the field of Sociology;

AMA: Prevalent in Healthcare, Nursing, and Medicine fields of study;

CSE: This style is obligatory for those who study Life sciences, especially Biology;

APSA: Students majoring in Political Science should know all details of this style.

Create citations for free

Is there a way to get help.

Choosing a topic, researching, conducting experiments, using formal language, checking if all formatting requirements are met - the whole process of writing a research paper may appear overwhelming, sometimes even scary. One might think: “How can I write my paper perfectly if it takes years to become a great writer?” And the answer is positive since there are quality services that provide around-the-clock assistance of native-speaking writers with graduate degrees who can help you solve all academic writing issues. Learning is easier if someone can provide experienced backup with the research and writing process itself.

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback, related blog posts, learn how to write an introduction for a research paper.

Though introduction to any writing is frequently associated with beginning, it's not that simple for an introduction to a research paper. Here you ...

200+ Top Sociology Research Topics

Table of contents Research Methods of Sociology Tips on How to Choose a Good Topic for Sociology Research Sociology Research Topics I...

How to craft research objectives: guidelines & tips

In the ever-evolving landscape of academic study, having clear and well-defined research objectives is crucial for the success of any work. Study a...

Join our 150K of happy users

• Get original papers written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Genre and the Research Paper

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

Research: What it is.

A research paper is the culmination and final product of an involved process of research, critical thinking, source evaluation, organization, and composition. It is, perhaps, helpful to think of the research paper as a living thing, which grows and changes as the student explores, interprets, and evaluates sources related to a specific topic. Primary and secondary sources are the heart of a research paper, and provide its nourishment; without the support of and interaction with these sources, the research paper would morph into a different genre of writing (e.g., an encyclopedic article). The research paper serves not only to further the field in which it is written, but also to provide the student with an exceptional opportunity to increase her knowledge in that field. It is also possible to identify a research paper by what it is not.

Research: What it is not.

A research paper is not simply an informed summary of a topic by means of primary and secondary sources. It is neither a book report nor an opinion piece nor an expository essay consisting solely of one's interpretation of a text nor an overview of a particular topic. Instead, it is a genre that requires one to spend time investigating and evaluating sources with the intent to offer interpretations of the texts, and not unconscious regurgitations of those sources. The goal of a research paper is not to inform the reader what others have to say about a topic, but to draw on what others have to say about a topic and engage the sources in order to thoughtfully offer a unique perspective on the issue at hand. This is accomplished through two major types of research papers.

Two major types of research papers.

Argumentative research paper:

The argumentative research paper consists of an introduction in which the writer clearly introduces the topic and informs his audience exactly which stance he intends to take; this stance is often identified as the thesis statement . An important goal of the argumentative research paper is persuasion, which means the topic chosen should be debatable or controversial. For example, it would be difficult for a student to successfully argue in favor of the following stance.

Perhaps 25 years ago this topic would have been debatable; however, today, it is assumed that smoking cigarettes is, indeed, harmful to one's health. A better thesis would be the following.

In this sentence, the writer is not challenging the current accepted stance that both firsthand and secondhand cigarette smoke is dangerous; rather, she is positing that the social acceptance of the latter over the former is indicative of a cultural double-standard of sorts. The student would support this thesis throughout her paper by means of both primary and secondary sources, with the intent to persuade her audience that her particular interpretation of the situation is viable.

Analytical research paper:

The analytical research paper often begins with the student asking a question (a.k.a. a research question) on which he has taken no stance. Such a paper is often an exercise in exploration and evaluation. For example, perhaps one is interested in the Old English poem Beowulf . He has read the poem intently and desires to offer a fresh reading of the poem to the academic community. His question may be as follows.

His research may lead him to the following conclusion.

Though his topic may be debatable and controversial, it is not the student's intent to persuade the audience that his ideas are right while those of others are wrong. Instead, his goal is to offer a critical interpretation of primary and secondary sources throughout the paper--sources that should, ultimately, buttress his particular analysis of the topic. The following is an example of what his thesis statement may look like once he has completed his research.

This statement does not negate the traditional readings of Beowulf ; instead, it offers a fresh and detailed reading of the poem that will be supported by the student's research.

It is typically not until the student has begun the writing process that his thesis statement begins to take solid form. In fact, the thesis statement in an analytical paper is often more fluid than the thesis in an argumentative paper. Such is one of the benefits of approaching the topic without a predetermined stance.

Confusion to Clarity: Definition of Terms in a Research Paper

Explore the definition of terms in research paper to enhance your understanding of crucial scientific terminology and grow your knowledge.

Have you ever come across a research paper and found yourself scratching your head over complex synonyms and unfamiliar terms? It’s a hassle as you have to fetch a dictionary and then ruffle through it to find the meaning of the terms.

To avoid that, an exclusive section called ‘ Definition of Terms in a Research Paper ’ is introduced which contains the definitions of terms used in the paper. Let us learn more about it in this article.

What Is The “Definition Of Terms” In A Research Paper?

The definition of terms section in a research paper provides a clear and concise explanation of key concepts, variables, and terminology used throughout the study. 

In the definition of terms section, researchers typically provide precise definitions for specific technical terms, acronyms, jargon, and any other domain-specific vocabulary used in their work. This section enhances the overall quality and rigor of the research by establishing a solid foundation for communication and understanding.

Purpose Of Definition Of Terms In A Research Paper

This section aims to ensure that readers have a common understanding of the terminology employed in the research, eliminating confusion and promoting clarity. The definitions provided serve as a reference point for readers, enabling them to comprehend the context and scope of the study. It serves several important purposes:

• Enhancing clarity
• Establishing a shared language
• Providing a reference point
• Setting the scope and context
• Ensuring consistency

Benefits Of Having A Definition Of Terms In A Research Paper

Having a definition of terms section in a research paper offers several benefits that contribute to the overall quality and effectiveness of the study. These benefits include:

Clarity And Comprehension

Clear definitions enable readers to understand the specific meanings of key terms, concepts, and variables used in the research. This promotes clarity and enhances comprehension, ensuring that readers can follow the study’s arguments, methods, and findings more easily.

Consistency And Precision

Definitions provide a consistent framework for the use of terminology throughout the research paper. By clearly defining terms, researchers establish a standard vocabulary, reducing ambiguity and potential misunderstandings. This precision enhances the accuracy and reliability of the study’s findings.

Common Understanding

The definition of terms section helps establish a shared understanding among readers, including those from different disciplines or with varying levels of familiarity with the subject matter. It ensures that readers approach the research with a common knowledge base, facilitating effective communication and interpretation of the results.

Avoiding Misinterpretation

Without clear definitions, readers may interpret terms and concepts differently, leading to misinterpretation of the research findings. By providing explicit definitions, researchers minimize the risk of misunderstandings and ensure that readers grasp the intended meaning of the terminology used in the study.

Accessibility For Diverse Audiences

Research papers are often read by a wide range of individuals, including researchers, students, policymakers, and professionals. Having a definition of terms in a research paper helps the diverse audience understand the concepts better and make appropriate decisions. 

Types Of Definitions

There are several types of definitions that researchers can employ in a research paper, depending on the context and nature of the study. Here are some common types of definitions:

Lexical Definitions

Lexical definitions provide the dictionary or commonly accepted meaning of a term. They offer a concise and widely recognized explanation of a word or concept. Lexical definitions are useful for establishing a baseline understanding of a term, especially when dealing with everyday language or non-technical terms.

Operational Definitions

Operational definitions define a term or concept about how it is measured or observed in the study. These definitions specify the procedures, instruments, or criteria used to operationalize an abstract or theoretical concept. Operational definitions help ensure clarity and consistency in data collection and measurement.

Conceptual Definitions

Conceptual definitions provide an abstract or theoretical understanding of a term or concept within a specific research context. They often involve a more detailed and nuanced explanation, exploring the underlying principles, theories, or models that inform the concept. Conceptual definitions are useful for establishing a theoretical framework and promoting deeper understanding.

Descriptive Definitions

Descriptive definitions describe a term or concept by providing characteristics, features, or attributes associated with it. These definitions focus on outlining the essential qualities or elements that define the term. Descriptive definitions help readers grasp the nature and scope of a concept by painting a detailed picture.

Theoretical Definitions

Theoretical definitions explain a term or concept based on established theories or conceptual frameworks. They situate the concept within a broader theoretical context, connecting it to relevant literature and existing knowledge. Theoretical definitions help researchers establish the theoretical underpinnings of their study and provide a foundation for further analysis.

Also read: Understanding What is Theoretical Framework

Types Of Terms

In research papers, various types of terms can be identified based on their nature and usage. Here are some common types of terms:

A key term is a term that holds significant importance or plays a crucial role within the context of a research paper. It is a term that encapsulates a core concept, idea, or variable that is central to the study. Key terms are often essential for understanding the research objectives, methodology, findings, and conclusions.

Technical Term

Technical terms refer to specialized vocabulary or terminology used within a specific field of study. These terms are often precise and have specific meanings within their respective disciplines. Examples include “allele,” “hypothesis testing,” or “algorithm.”

Legal Terms

Legal terms are specific vocabulary used within the legal field to describe concepts, principles, and regulations. These terms have particular meanings within the legal context. Examples include “defendant,” “plaintiff,” “due process,” or “jurisdiction.”

Definitional Term

A definitional term refers to a word or phrase that requires an explicit definition to ensure clarity and understanding within a particular context. These terms may be technical, abstract, or have multiple interpretations.

Career Privacy Term

Career privacy term refers to a concept or idea related to the privacy of individuals in the context of their professional or occupational activities. It encompasses the protection of personal information, and confidential data, and the right to control the disclosure of sensitive career-related details. 

A broad term is a term that encompasses a wide range of related concepts, ideas, or objects. It has a broader scope and may encompass multiple subcategories or specific examples.

Also read: Keywords In A Research Paper: The Importance Of The Right Choice

Steps To Writing Definitions Of Terms

When writing the definition of terms section for a research paper, you can follow these steps to ensure clarity and accuracy:

Step 1: Identify Key Terms

Review your research paper and identify the key terms that require definition. These terms are typically central to your study, specific to your field or topic, or may have different interpretations.

Step 2: Conduct Research

Conduct thorough research on each key term to understand its commonly accepted definition, usage, and any variations or nuances within your specific research context. Consult authoritative sources such as academic journals, books, or reputable online resources.

Step 3: Craft Concise Definitions

Based on your research, craft concise definitions for each key term. Aim for clarity, precision, and relevance. Define the term in a manner that reflects its significance within your research and ensures reader comprehension.

Step 4: Use Your Own Words

Paraphrase the definitions in your own words to avoid plagiarism and maintain academic integrity. While you can draw inspiration from existing definitions, rephrase them to reflect your understanding and writing style. Avoid directly copying from sources.

Step 5: Provide Examples Or Explanations

Consider providing examples, explanations, or context for the defined terms to enhance reader understanding. This can help illustrate how the term is applied within your research or clarify its practical implications.

Step 6: Order And Format

Decide on the order in which you present the definitions. You can follow alphabetical order or arrange them based on their importance or relevance to your research. Use consistent formatting, such as bold or italics, to distinguish the defined terms from the rest of the text.

Step 7: Revise And Refine

Review the definitions for clarity, coherence, and accuracy. Ensure that they align with your research objectives and are tailored to your specific study. Seek feedback from peers, mentors, or experts in your field to further refine and improve the definitions.

Step 8: Include Proper Citations

If you have drawn ideas or information from external sources, remember to provide proper citations for those sources. This demonstrates academic integrity and acknowledges the original authors.

Step 9: Incorporate The Section Into Your Paper

Integrate the definition of terms section into your research paper, typically as an early section following the introduction. Make sure it flows smoothly with the rest of the paper and provides a solid foundation for understanding the subsequent content.

By following these steps, you can create a well-crafted and informative definition of terms section that enhances the clarity and comprehension of your research paper.

In conclusion, the definition of terms in a research paper plays a critical role by providing clarity, establishing a common understanding, and enhancing communication among readers. The definition of terms section is an essential component that contributes to the overall quality, rigor, and effectiveness of a research paper.

Also read: Beyond The Main Text: The Value Of A Research Paper Appendix

Join Our Fast-Growing Community Of Users To Revolutionize Scientific Communication!

Every individual needs a community to learn, grow, and nurture their hobbies, passions, and skills. But when you are a scientist, it becomes difficult to identify the right community that aligns with your goals, has like-minded professionals, and understands mutual collaboration. 

If you are a scientist, looking for a great community, Mind the Graph is here. Join our fast-growing community of users to revolutionize scientific communication and build a healthy collaboration. Sign up for free.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Sign Up for Free

Try the best infographic maker and promote your research with scientifically-accurate beautiful figures

no credit card required

About Sowjanya Pedada

Sowjanya is a passionate writer and an avid reader. She holds MBA in Agribusiness Management and now is working as a content writer. She loves to play with words and hopes to make a difference in the world through her writings. Apart from writing, she is interested in reading fiction novels and doing craftwork. She also loves to travel and explore different cuisines and spend time with her family and friends.

Content tags

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

Glossary of research terms.

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• 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

This glossary is intended to assist you in understanding commonly used terms and concepts when reading, interpreting, and evaluating scholarly research. Also included are common words and phrases defined within the context of how they apply to research in the social and behavioral sciences.

• Acculturation -- refers to the process of adapting to another culture, particularly in reference to blending in with the majority population [e.g., an immigrant adopting American customs]. However, acculturation also implies that both cultures add something to one another, but still remain distinct groups unto themselves.
• Accuracy -- a term used in survey research to refer to the match between the target population and the sample.
• Affective Measures -- procedures or devices used to obtain quantified descriptions of an individual's feelings, emotional states, or dispositions.
• Aggregate -- a total created from smaller units. For instance, the population of a county is an aggregate of the populations of the cities, rural areas, etc. that comprise the county. As a verb, it refers to total data from smaller units into a large unit.
• Anonymity -- a research condition in which no one, including the researcher, knows the identities of research participants.
• Baseline -- a control measurement carried out before an experimental treatment.
• Behaviorism -- school of psychological thought concerned with the observable, tangible, objective facts of behavior, rather than with subjective phenomena such as thoughts, emotions, or impulses. Contemporary behaviorism also emphasizes the study of mental states such as feelings and fantasies to the extent that they can be directly observed and measured.
• Beliefs -- ideas, doctrines, tenets, etc. that are accepted as true on grounds which are not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof.
• Benchmarking -- systematically measuring and comparing the operations and outcomes of organizations, systems, processes, etc., against agreed upon "best-in-class" frames of reference.
• Bias -- a loss of balance and accuracy in the use of research methods. It can appear in research via the sampling frame, random sampling, or non-response. It can also occur at other stages in research, such as while interviewing, in the design of questions, or in the way data are analyzed and presented. Bias means that the research findings will not be representative of, or generalizable to, a wider population.
• Case Study -- the collection and presentation of detailed information about a particular participant or small group, frequently including data derived from the subjects themselves.
• Causal Hypothesis -- a statement hypothesizing that the independent variable affects the dependent variable in some way.
• Causal Relationship -- the relationship established that shows that an independent variable, and nothing else, causes a change in a dependent variable. It also establishes how much of a change is shown in the dependent variable.
• Causality -- the relation between cause and effect.
• Central Tendency -- any way of describing or characterizing typical, average, or common values in some distribution.
• Chi-square Analysis -- a common non-parametric statistical test which compares an expected proportion or ratio to an actual proportion or ratio.
• Claim -- a statement, similar to a hypothesis, which is made in response to the research question and that is affirmed with evidence based on research.
• Classification -- ordering of related phenomena into categories, groups, or systems according to characteristics or attributes.
• Cluster Analysis -- a method of statistical analysis where data that share a common trait are grouped together. The data is collected in a way that allows the data collector to group data according to certain characteristics.
• Cohort Analysis -- group by group analytic treatment of individuals having a statistical factor in common to each group. Group members share a particular characteristic [e.g., born in a given year] or a common experience [e.g., entering a college at a given time].
• Confidentiality -- a research condition in which no one except the researcher(s) knows the identities of the participants in a study. It refers to the treatment of information that a participant has disclosed to the researcher in a relationship of trust and with the expectation that it will not be revealed to others in ways that violate the original consent agreement, unless permission is granted by the participant.
• Confirmability Objectivity -- the findings of the study could be confirmed by another person conducting the same study.
• Construct -- refers to any of the following: something that exists theoretically but is not directly observable; a concept developed [constructed] for describing relations among phenomena or for other research purposes; or, a theoretical definition in which concepts are defined in terms of other concepts. For example, intelligence cannot be directly observed or measured; it is a construct.
• Construct Validity -- seeks an agreement between a theoretical concept and a specific measuring device, such as observation.
• Constructivism -- the idea that reality is socially constructed. It is the view that reality cannot be understood outside of the way humans interact and that the idea that knowledge is constructed, not discovered. Constructivists believe that learning is more active and self-directed than either behaviorism or cognitive theory would postulate.
• Content Analysis -- the systematic, objective, and quantitative description of the manifest or latent content of print or nonprint communications.
• Context Sensitivity -- awareness by a qualitative researcher of factors such as values and beliefs that influence cultural behaviors.
• Control Group -- the group in an experimental design that receives either no treatment or a different treatment from the experimental group. This group can thus be compared to the experimental group.
• Controlled Experiment -- an experimental design with two or more randomly selected groups [an experimental group and control group] in which the researcher controls or introduces the independent variable and measures the dependent variable at least two times [pre- and post-test measurements].
• Correlation -- a common statistical analysis, usually abbreviated as r, that measures the degree of relationship between pairs of interval variables in a sample. The range of correlation is from -1.00 to zero to +1.00. Also, a non-cause and effect relationship between two variables.
• Covariate -- a product of the correlation of two related variables times their standard deviations. Used in true experiments to measure the difference of treatment between them.
• Credibility -- a researcher's ability to demonstrate that the object of a study is accurately identified and described based on the way in which the study was conducted.
• Critical Theory -- an evaluative approach to social science research, associated with Germany's neo-Marxist “Frankfurt School,” that aims to criticize as well as analyze society, opposing the political orthodoxy of modern communism. Its goal is to promote human emancipatory forces and to expose ideas and systems that impede them.
• Data -- factual information [as measurements or statistics] used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or calculation.
• Data Mining -- the process of analyzing data from different perspectives and summarizing it into useful information, often to discover patterns and/or systematic relationships among variables.
• Data Quality -- this is the degree to which the collected data [results of measurement or observation] meet the standards of quality to be considered valid [trustworthy] and  reliable [dependable].
• Deductive -- a form of reasoning in which conclusions are formulated about particulars from general or universal premises.
• Dependability -- being able to account for changes in the design of the study and the changing conditions surrounding what was studied.
• Dependent Variable -- a variable that varies due, at least in part, to the impact of the independent variable. In other words, its value “depends” on the value of the independent variable. For example, in the variables “gender” and “academic major,” academic major is the dependent variable, meaning that your major cannot determine whether you are male or female, but your gender might indirectly lead you to favor one major over another.
• Deviation -- the distance between the mean and a particular data point in a given distribution.
• Discourse Community -- a community of scholars and researchers in a given field who respond to and communicate to each other through published articles in the community's journals and presentations at conventions. All members of the discourse community adhere to certain conventions for the presentation of their theories and research.
• Discrete Variable -- a variable that is measured solely in whole units, such as, gender and number of siblings.
• Distribution -- the range of values of a particular variable.
• Effect Size -- the amount of change in a dependent variable that can be attributed to manipulations of the independent variable. A large effect size exists when the value of the dependent variable is strongly influenced by the independent variable. It is the mean difference on a variable between experimental and control groups divided by the standard deviation on that variable of the pooled groups or of the control group alone.
• Emancipatory Research -- research is conducted on and with people from marginalized groups or communities. It is led by a researcher or research team who is either an indigenous or external insider; is interpreted within intellectual frameworks of that group; and, is conducted largely for the purpose of empowering members of that community and improving services for them. It also engages members of the community as co-constructors or validators of knowledge.
• Empirical Research -- the process of developing systematized knowledge gained from observations that are formulated to support insights and generalizations about the phenomena being researched.
• Epistemology -- concerns knowledge construction; asks what constitutes knowledge and how knowledge is validated.
• Ethnography -- method to study groups and/or cultures over a period of time. The goal of this type of research is to comprehend the particular group/culture through immersion into the culture or group. Research is completed through various methods but, since the researcher is immersed within the group for an extended period of time, more detailed information is usually collected during the research.
• Expectancy Effect -- any unconscious or conscious cues that convey to the participant in a study how the researcher wants them to respond. Expecting someone to behave in a particular way has been shown to promote the expected behavior. Expectancy effects can be minimized by using standardized interactions with subjects, automated data-gathering methods, and double blind protocols.
• External Validity -- the extent to which the results of a study are generalizable or transferable.
• Factor Analysis -- a statistical test that explores relationships among data. The test explores which variables in a data set are most related to each other. In a carefully constructed survey, for example, factor analysis can yield information on patterns of responses, not simply data on a single response. Larger tendencies may then be interpreted, indicating behavior trends rather than simply responses to specific questions.
• Field Studies -- academic or other investigative studies undertaken in a natural setting, rather than in laboratories, classrooms, or other structured environments.
• Focus Groups -- small, roundtable discussion groups charged with examining specific topics or problems, including possible options or solutions. Focus groups usually consist of 4-12 participants, guided by moderators to keep the discussion flowing and to collect and report the results.
• Framework -- the structure and support that may be used as both the launching point and the on-going guidelines for investigating a research problem.
• Generalizability -- the extent to which research findings and conclusions conducted on a specific study to groups or situations can be applied to the population at large.
• Grey Literature -- research produced by organizations outside of commercial and academic publishing that publish materials, such as, working papers, research reports, and briefing papers.
• Grounded Theory -- practice of developing other theories that emerge from observing a group. Theories are grounded in the group's observable experiences, but researchers add their own insight into why those experiences exist.
• Group Behavior -- behaviors of a group as a whole, as well as the behavior of an individual as influenced by his or her membership in a group.
• Hypothesis -- a tentative explanation based on theory to predict a causal relationship between variables.
• Independent Variable -- the conditions of an experiment that are systematically manipulated by the researcher. A variable that is not impacted by the dependent variable, and that itself impacts the dependent variable. In the earlier example of "gender" and "academic major," (see Dependent Variable) gender is the independent variable.
• Individualism -- a theory or policy having primary regard for the liberty, rights, or independent actions of individuals.
• Inductive -- a form of reasoning in which a generalized conclusion is formulated from particular instances.
• Inductive Analysis -- a form of analysis based on inductive reasoning; a researcher using inductive analysis starts with answers, but formulates questions throughout the research process.
• Insiderness -- a concept in qualitative research that refers to the degree to which a researcher has access to and an understanding of persons, places, or things within a group or community based on being a member of that group or community.
• Internal Consistency -- the extent to which all questions or items assess the same characteristic, skill, or quality.
• Internal Validity -- the rigor with which the study was conducted [e.g., the study's design, the care taken to conduct measurements, and decisions concerning what was and was not measured]. It is also the extent to which the designers of a study have taken into account alternative explanations for any causal relationships they explore. In studies that do not explore causal relationships, only the first of these definitions should be considered when assessing internal validity.
• Life History -- a record of an event/events in a respondent's life told [written down, but increasingly audio or video recorded] by the respondent from his/her own perspective in his/her own words. A life history is different from a "research story" in that it covers a longer time span, perhaps a complete life, or a significant period in a life.
• Margin of Error -- the permittable or acceptable deviation from the target or a specific value. The allowance for slight error or miscalculation or changing circumstances in a study.
• Measurement -- process of obtaining a numerical description of the extent to which persons, organizations, or things possess specified characteristics.
• Meta-Analysis -- an analysis combining the results of several studies that address a set of related hypotheses.
• Methodology -- a theory or analysis of how research does and should proceed.
• Methods -- systematic approaches to the conduct of an operation or process. It includes steps of procedure, application of techniques, systems of reasoning or analysis, and the modes of inquiry employed by a discipline.
• Mixed-Methods -- a research approach that uses two or more methods from both the quantitative and qualitative research categories. It is also referred to as blended methods, combined methods, or methodological triangulation.
• Modeling -- the creation of a physical or computer analogy to understand a particular phenomenon. Modeling helps in estimating the relative magnitude of various factors involved in a phenomenon. A successful model can be shown to account for unexpected behavior that has been observed, to predict certain behaviors, which can then be tested experimentally, and to demonstrate that a given theory cannot account for certain phenomenon.
• Models -- representations of objects, principles, processes, or ideas often used for imitation or emulation.
• Naturalistic Observation -- observation of behaviors and events in natural settings without experimental manipulation or other forms of interference.
• Norm -- the norm in statistics is the average or usual performance. For example, students usually complete their high school graduation requirements when they are 18 years old. Even though some students graduate when they are younger or older, the norm is that any given student will graduate when he or she is 18 years old.
• Null Hypothesis -- the proposition, to be tested statistically, that the experimental intervention has "no effect," meaning that the treatment and control groups will not differ as a result of the intervention. Investigators usually hope that the data will demonstrate some effect from the intervention, thus allowing the investigator to reject the null hypothesis.
• Ontology -- a discipline of philosophy that explores the science of what is, the kinds and structures of objects, properties, events, processes, and relations in every area of reality.
• Panel Study -- a longitudinal study in which a group of individuals is interviewed at intervals over a period of time.
• Participant -- individuals whose physiological and/or behavioral characteristics and responses are the object of study in a research project.
• Peer-Review -- the process in which the author of a book, article, or other type of publication submits his or her work to experts in the field for critical evaluation, usually prior to publication. This is standard procedure in publishing scholarly research.
• Phenomenology -- a qualitative research approach concerned with understanding certain group behaviors from that group's point of view.
• Philosophy -- critical examination of the grounds for fundamental beliefs and analysis of the basic concepts, doctrines, or practices that express such beliefs.
• Phonology -- the study of the ways in which speech sounds form systems and patterns in language.
• Policy -- governing principles that serve as guidelines or rules for decision making and action in a given area.
• Policy Analysis -- systematic study of the nature, rationale, cost, impact, effectiveness, implications, etc., of existing or alternative policies, using the theories and methodologies of relevant social science disciplines.
• Population -- the target group under investigation. The population is the entire set under consideration. Samples are drawn from populations.
• Position Papers -- statements of official or organizational viewpoints, often recommending a particular course of action or response to a situation.
• Positivism -- a doctrine in the philosophy of science, positivism argues that science can only deal with observable entities known directly to experience. The positivist aims to construct general laws, or theories, which express relationships between phenomena. Observation and experiment is used to show whether the phenomena fit the theory.
• Predictive Measurement -- use of tests, inventories, or other measures to determine or estimate future events, conditions, outcomes, or trends.
• Principal Investigator -- the scientist or scholar with primary responsibility for the design and conduct of a research project.
• Probability -- the chance that a phenomenon will occur randomly. As a statistical measure, it is shown as p [the "p" factor].
• Questionnaire -- structured sets of questions on specified subjects that are used to gather information, attitudes, or opinions.
• Random Sampling -- a process used in research to draw a sample of a population strictly by chance, yielding no discernible pattern beyond chance. Random sampling can be accomplished by first numbering the population, then selecting the sample according to a table of random numbers or using a random-number computer generator. The sample is said to be random because there is no regular or discernible pattern or order. Random sample selection is used under the assumption that sufficiently large samples assigned randomly will exhibit a distribution comparable to that of the population from which the sample is drawn. The random assignment of participants increases the probability that differences observed between participant groups are the result of the experimental intervention.
• Reliability -- the degree to which a measure yields consistent results. If the measuring instrument [e.g., survey] is reliable, then administering it to similar groups would yield similar results. Reliability is a prerequisite for validity. An unreliable indicator cannot produce trustworthy results.
• Representative Sample -- sample in which the participants closely match the characteristics of the population, and thus, all segments of the population are represented in the sample. A representative sample allows results to be generalized from the sample to the population.
• Rigor -- degree to which research methods are scrupulously and meticulously carried out in order to recognize important influences occurring in an experimental study.
• Sample -- the population researched in a particular study. Usually, attempts are made to select a "sample population" that is considered representative of groups of people to whom results will be generalized or transferred. In studies that use inferential statistics to analyze results or which are designed to be generalizable, sample size is critical, generally the larger the number in the sample, the higher the likelihood of a representative distribution of the population.
• Sampling Error -- the degree to which the results from the sample deviate from those that would be obtained from the entire population, because of random error in the selection of respondent and the corresponding reduction in reliability.
• Saturation -- a situation in which data analysis begins to reveal repetition and redundancy and when new data tend to confirm existing findings rather than expand upon them.
• Semantics -- the relationship between symbols and meaning in a linguistic system. Also, the cuing system that connects what is written in the text to what is stored in the reader's prior knowledge.
• Social Theories -- theories about the structure, organization, and functioning of human societies.
• Sociolinguistics -- the study of language in society and, more specifically, the study of language varieties, their functions, and their speakers.
• Standard Deviation -- a measure of variation that indicates the typical distance between the scores of a distribution and the mean; it is determined by taking the square root of the average of the squared deviations in a given distribution. It can be used to indicate the proportion of data within certain ranges of scale values when the distribution conforms closely to the normal curve.
• Statistical Analysis -- application of statistical processes and theory to the compilation, presentation, discussion, and interpretation of numerical data.
• Statistical Bias -- characteristics of an experimental or sampling design, or the mathematical treatment of data, that systematically affects the results of a study so as to produce incorrect, unjustified, or inappropriate inferences or conclusions.
• Statistical Significance -- the probability that the difference between the outcomes of the control and experimental group are great enough that it is unlikely due solely to chance. The probability that the null hypothesis can be rejected at a predetermined significance level [0.05 or 0.01].
• Statistical Tests -- researchers use statistical tests to make quantitative decisions about whether a study's data indicate a significant effect from the intervention and allow the researcher to reject the null hypothesis. That is, statistical tests show whether the differences between the outcomes of the control and experimental groups are great enough to be statistically significant. If differences are found to be statistically significant, it means that the probability [likelihood] that these differences occurred solely due to chance is relatively low. Most researchers agree that a significance value of .05 or less [i.e., there is a 95% probability that the differences are real] sufficiently determines significance.
• Subcultures -- ethnic, regional, economic, or social groups exhibiting characteristic patterns of behavior sufficient to distinguish them from the larger society to which they belong.
• Testing -- the act of gathering and processing information about individuals' ability, skill, understanding, or knowledge under controlled conditions.
• Theory -- a general explanation about a specific behavior or set of events that is based on known principles and serves to organize related events in a meaningful way. A theory is not as specific as a hypothesis.
• Treatment -- the stimulus given to a dependent variable.
• Trend Samples -- method of sampling different groups of people at different points in time from the same population.
• Triangulation -- a multi-method or pluralistic approach, using different methods in order to focus on the research topic from different viewpoints and to produce a multi-faceted set of data. Also used to check the validity of findings from any one method.
• Unit of Analysis -- the basic observable entity or phenomenon being analyzed by a study and for which data are collected in the form of variables.
• Validity -- the degree to which a study accurately reflects or assesses the specific concept that the researcher is attempting to measure. A method can be reliable, consistently measuring the same thing, but not valid.
• Variable -- any characteristic or trait that can vary from one person to another [race, gender, academic major] or for one person over time [age, political beliefs].
• Weighted Scores -- scores in which the components are modified by different multipliers to reflect their relative importance.
• White Paper -- an authoritative report that often states the position or philosophy about a social, political, or other subject, or a general explanation of an architecture, framework, or product technology written by a group of researchers. A white paper seeks to contain unbiased information and analysis regarding a business or policy problem that the researchers may be facing.

Elliot, Mark, Fairweather, Ian, Olsen, Wendy Kay, and Pampaka, Maria. A Dictionary of Social Research Methods. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2016; Free Social Science Dictionary. Socialsciencedictionary.com [2008]. Glossary. Institutional Review Board. Colorado College; Glossary of Key Terms. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Glossary A-Z. Education.com; Glossary of Research Terms. Research Mindedness Virtual Learning Resource. Centre for Human Servive Technology. University of Southampton; Miller, Robert L. and Brewer, John D. The A-Z of Social Research: A Dictionary of Key Social Science Research Concepts London: SAGE, 2003; Jupp, Victor. The SAGE Dictionary of Social and Cultural Research Methods . London: Sage, 2006.

• << Previous: Independent and Dependent Variables
• Next: 1. Choosing a Research Problem >>
• Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 9:40 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Organizing Academic Research Papers: 6. The Methodology

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Executive Summary
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• How to Manage Group Projects
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Essays
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Acknowledgements

The methods section of a research paper provides the information by which a study’s validity is judged. The method section answers two main questions: 1) How was the data collected or generated? 2) How was it analyzed? The writing should be direct and precise and written in the past tense.

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 choose affects the results and, by extension, how you likely interpreted those results.
• Methodology is crucial for any branch of scholarship because an unreliable method produces unreliable results and it misappropriates interpretations of findings .
• In most cases, there are a variety of different methods you can choose to investigate a research problem. Your methodology section of your paper should make clear the reasons why you chose a particular method or procedure .
• 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 questionnaire, readers need to know that it offered your respondents a reasonable range of answers to choose from.
• The research method must be appropriate to the objectives of the study . For example, be sure 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 did arise, you must describe the ways in which their impact was minimized or why these problems do not affect the findings in any way that impacts your interpretation of the data.
• Often in social science research, it is useful for other researchers to adapt or replicate your methodology. Therefore, it is important to always provide sufficient information to allow others to use or replicate the study . This information is particularly important when a new method had been developed or an innovative use of an existing method has been utilized.

Bem, Daryl J. Writing the Empirical Journal Article . Psychology Writing Center. University of Washington; 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 empirical-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 hypotheses that need to be tested. This approach is focused on explanation .
• The interpretative group is focused on understanding phenomenon in a comprehensive, holistic way . This research method allows you to recognize your connection to the subject under study. Because the interpretative group focuses more on subjective knowledge, it requires careful interpretation of variables.

II. Content

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 should have a clear connection with 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 unsuited 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.
• 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?
• Provide background and 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 rationale 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 statisics being used? If other data sources exist, explain why the data you chose is most appropriate.
• Address 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.

III.  Problems to Avoid

Irrelevant Detail The methodology section of your paper should be thorough but to the point. Don’t provide any background information that doesn’t directly help the reader to understand why a particular method was chosen, how the data was gathered or obtained, and how it was analyzed. 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. NOTE: An exception to this rule is if you select an unconventional approach to doing the method; if this is the case, be sure to explain why this approach was chosen and how it enhances the overall research process. Problem Blindness It is almost a given that you will encounter problems when collecting or generating your data. 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 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; 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; 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; 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.

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 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.

• << Previous: What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Next: Qualitative Methods >>
• Last Updated: Jul 18, 2023 11:58 AM
• URL: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
• QuickSearch
• Library Catalog
• Databases A-Z
• Publication Finder
• Course Reserves
• Citation Linker
• Digital Commons
• Our Website

Research Support

• Ask a Librarian
• Appointments
• Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
• Research Guides
• Databases by Subject
• Citation Help

Using the Library

• Reserve a Group Study Room
• Renew Books
• Honors Study Rooms
• Off-Campus Access
• Library Policies
• Library Technology

User Information

• Grad Students
• Online Students
• COVID-19 Updates
• Staff Directory
• News & Announcements
• Library Newsletter

My Accounts

• Interlibrary Loan
• Staff Site Login

FIND US ON  

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• Research Objectives | Definition & Examples

Research Objectives | Definition & Examples

Published on July 12, 2022 by Eoghan Ryan . Revised on November 20, 2023.

Research objectives describe what your research is trying to achieve and explain why you are pursuing it. They summarize the approach and purpose of your project and help to focus your research.

Your objectives should appear in the introduction of your research paper , at the end of your problem statement . They should:

• Establish the scope and depth of your project
• Contribute to your research design
• Indicate how your project will contribute to existing knowledge

Table of contents

What is a research objective, why are research objectives important, how to write research aims and objectives, smart research objectives, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research objectives.

Research objectives describe what your research project intends to accomplish. They should guide every step of the research process , including how you collect data , build your argument , and develop your conclusions .

Your research objectives may evolve slightly as your research progresses, but they should always line up with the research carried out and the actual content of your paper.

Research aims

A distinction is often made between research objectives and research aims.

A research aim typically refers to a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear at the end of your problem statement, before your research objectives.

Your research objectives are more specific than your research aim and indicate the particular focus and approach of your project. Though you will only have one research aim, you will likely have several research objectives.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Research objectives are important because they:

• Establish the scope and depth of your project: This helps you avoid unnecessary research. It also means that your research methods and conclusions can easily be evaluated .
• Contribute to your research design: When you know what your objectives are, you have a clearer idea of what methods are most appropriate for your research.
• Indicate how your project will contribute to extant research: They allow you to display your knowledge of up-to-date research, employ or build on current research methods, and attempt to contribute to recent debates.

Once you’ve established a research problem you want to address, you need to decide how you will address it. This is where your research aim and objectives come in.

Step 1: Decide on a general aim

Your research aim should reflect your research problem and should be relatively broad.

Step 2: Decide on specific objectives

Break down your aim into a limited number of steps that will help you resolve your research problem. What specific aspects of the problem do you want to examine or understand?

Step 3: Formulate your aims and objectives

Once you’ve established your research aim and objectives, you need to explain them clearly and concisely to the reader.

You’ll lay out your aims and objectives at the end of your problem statement, which appears in your introduction. Frame them as clear declarative statements, and use appropriate verbs to accurately characterize the work that you will carry out.

The acronym “SMART” is commonly used in relation to research objectives. It states that your objectives should be:

• Specific: Make sure your objectives aren’t overly vague. Your research needs to be clearly defined in order to get useful results.
• Measurable: Know how you’ll measure whether your objectives have been achieved.
• Achievable: Your objectives may be challenging, but they should be feasible. Make sure that relevant groundwork has been done on your topic or that relevant primary or secondary sources exist. Also ensure that you have access to relevant research facilities (labs, library resources , research databases , etc.).
• Relevant: Make sure that they directly address the research problem you want to work on and that they contribute to the current state of research in your field.
• Time-based: Set clear deadlines for objectives to ensure that the project stays on track.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

Research objectives describe what you intend your research project to accomplish.

They summarize the approach and purpose of the project and help to focus your research.

Your objectives should appear in the introduction of your research paper , at the end of your problem statement .

Your research objectives indicate how you’ll try to address your research problem and should be specific:

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

Scope of research is determined at the beginning of your research process , prior to the data collection stage. Sometimes called “scope of study,” your scope delineates what will and will not be covered in your project. It helps you focus your work and your time, ensuring that you’ll be able to achieve your goals and outcomes.

Defining a scope can be very useful in any research project, from a research proposal to a thesis or dissertation . A scope is needed for all types of research: quantitative , qualitative , and mixed methods .

To define your scope of research, consider the following:

• Budget constraints or any specifics of grant funding
• Your proposed timeline and duration
• Specifics about your population of study, your proposed sample size , and the research methodology you’ll pursue
• Any inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Any anticipated control , extraneous , or confounding variables that could bias your research if not accounted for properly.

Cite this Scribbr article

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

Ryan, E. (2023, November 20). Research Objectives | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 4, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-objectives/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”