explain how a research proposal can be evaluated

Home » Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and Methods

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and Methods

Table of Contents

Evaluating Research

Research evaluation is a systematic process used to assess the quality, relevance, credibility, and overall contribution of a research study. Effective evaluation allows researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to determine the reliability of findings, understand the study’s strengths and limitations, and make informed decisions based on evidence. Research evaluation is crucial across disciplines, ensuring that conclusions drawn from studies are valid, meaningful, and applicable.

Why Evaluate Research?

Evaluating research provides several benefits, including:

Ensuring Credibility : Confirms the reliability and validity of research findings.
Identifying Limitations : Highlights potential biases, methodological flaws, or gaps.
Promoting Accountability : Helps allocate funding and resources to high-quality studies.
Supporting Decision-Making : Enables stakeholders to make informed decisions based on rigorous evidence.

Process of Evaluating Research

The evaluation process typically involves several steps, from understanding the research context to assessing methodology, analyzing data quality, and interpreting findings. Below is a step-by-step guide for evaluating research.

Step 1: Understand the Research Context

Identify the Purpose : Determine the study’s objectives and research questions.
Contextual Relevance : Evaluate the study’s relevance to current knowledge, theory, or practice.

Example : For a study examining the effects of social media on mental health, assess whether the study addresses an important and timely issue in the field of psychology.

Step 2: Assess Research Design and Methodology

Design Appropriateness : Determine if the research design is suitable for answering the research question (e.g., experimental, observational, qualitative, or quantitative).
Sampling : Evaluate the sample size, sampling methods, and participant selection to ensure they are representative of the population being studied.
Variables and Measures : Review how variables were defined and measured, and ensure that the measures are valid and reliable.

Example : In an experimental study on cognitive performance, check if participants were randomly assigned to control and treatment groups to ensure the design minimizes bias.

Step 3: Evaluate Data Collection and Analysis

Data Collection Methods : Assess the tools, procedures, and sources used for data collection. Ensure they align with the research question and minimize bias.
Statistical Analysis : Review the statistical methods used to analyze data. Check for appropriate use of tests, proper handling of variables, and accurate interpretation of results.
Ethics and Integrity : Consider whether data collection and analysis adhered to ethical guidelines, including participant consent, data confidentiality, and unbiased reporting.

Example : If a study uses surveys to collect data on job satisfaction, evaluate if the survey questions are clear, unbiased, and relevant to the research objectives.

Step 4: Interpret Results and Findings

Relevance of Findings : Determine whether the findings answer the research question and contribute meaningfully to the field.
Consistency with Existing Knowledge : Check if the results align with or contradict previous research. If they contradict, consider potential explanations for the differences.
Generalizability : Evaluate whether the findings are applicable to a broader population or specific to the study sample.

Example : For a study on the effects of a dietary supplement on athletic performance, assess whether the findings could be generalized to athletes of different ages, genders, or skill levels.

Step 5: Assess Limitations and Biases

Identifying Limitations : Recognize any acknowledged limitations in the study, such as small sample size, selection bias, or short duration.
Potential Biases : Consider potential sources of bias, including researcher bias, funding source bias, or publication bias.
Impact on Validity : Evaluate how limitations and biases might impact the study’s internal and external validity.

Example : If a study on drug efficacy was funded by a pharmaceutical company, acknowledge the potential for funding bias and whether safeguards were in place to maintain objectivity.

Step 6: Conclude with Overall Quality and Contribution

Summarize Strengths and Weaknesses : Provide an overview of the study’s strengths and limitations, focusing on aspects that affect the reliability and applicability of the findings.
Contribution to the Field : Assess the overall contribution to knowledge, practice, or policy, and identify any recommendations for future research or application.

Example : Conclude by summarizing whether the study’s methodology and findings are robust and suggest areas for future research, such as longer follow-up periods or larger sample sizes.

Examples of Research Evaluation

Purpose : To assess whether stress levels affect productivity.
Evaluation Process : Review if the sample includes participants with varying stress levels, if the stress is accurately measured (e.g., cortisol levels), and if the analysis properly accounts for confounding variables like sleep or work environment.
Conclusion : The study could be evaluated as robust if it uses valid measures and controlled conditions, with future research suggested on different population groups.
Purpose : To determine if digital learning tools improve student outcomes.
Evaluation Process : Assess the appropriateness of the sample (students with similar baseline knowledge), methodology (controlled comparisons of digital vs. traditional methods), and results interpretation.
Conclusion : Evaluate if findings are generalizable to broader educational contexts and whether technology access could be a limitation.
Purpose : To determine the efficacy of a new medication for treating anxiety.
Evaluation Process : Review if participants were randomly assigned, if a placebo was used, and if double-blinding was implemented to minimize bias.
Conclusion : If the study follows a strong experimental design, it could be deemed credible. Note potential side effects for further investigation.

Methods for Evaluating Research

Several methods are used to evaluate research, depending on the type of study, objectives, and evaluation criteria. Common methods include peer review , meta-analysis , systematic reviews , and quality assessment frameworks .

1. Peer Review

Definition : Peer review is a method in which experts in the field evaluate the study before publication. They assess the study’s quality, methodology, and contribution to the field.

Advantages :

Increases the credibility of the research.
Provides feedback on methodological rigor and relevance.

Example : Before publishing a study on environmental sustainability, experts in environmental science review its methods, findings, and implications.

2. Meta-Analysis

Definition : Meta-analysis is a statistical technique that combines results from multiple studies to draw broader conclusions. It focuses on studies with similar research questions or variables.

Offers a comprehensive view of a topic by synthesizing findings from various studies.
Identifies overall trends and potential effect sizes.

Example : Conducting a meta-analysis of studies on cognitive behavioral therapy to determine its effectiveness for treating depression across diverse populations.

3. Systematic Review

Definition : A systematic review evaluates and synthesizes findings from multiple studies, providing a high-level summary of evidence on a particular topic.

Follows a structured, transparent process for identifying and analyzing studies.
Helps identify gaps in research, limitations, and consistencies.

Example : A systematic review of research on the impact of exercise on mental health, summarizing evidence on exercise frequency, intensity, and outcomes.

4. Quality Assessment Frameworks

Definition : Quality assessment frameworks are tools used to evaluate the rigor and validity of research studies, often using checklists or scales.

Examples of Quality Assessment Tools :

CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) : Provides checklists for evaluating qualitative and quantitative research.
GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) : Assesses the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) : A guideline for systematic reviews, ensuring clarity and transparency in reporting.

Example : Using the CASP checklist to evaluate a qualitative study on patient satisfaction with healthcare services by assessing sampling, ethical considerations, and data validity.

Evaluating research is a critical process that enables researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to determine the quality and applicability of study findings. By following a structured evaluation process and using established methods like peer review, meta-analysis, systematic review, and quality assessment frameworks, stakeholders can make informed decisions based on robust evidence. Effective research evaluation not only enhances the credibility of individual studies but also contributes to the advancement of knowledge across disciplines.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide . Blackwell Publishing.
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., & Altman, D. G. (2008). Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Greenhalgh, T. (2019). How to Read a Paper: The Basics of Evidence-Based Medicine and Healthcare (6th ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (Eds.). (2011). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Version 5.1.0). The Cochrane Collaboration.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing...

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Table of Contents – Types, Formats, Examples

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Data Verification – Process, Types and Examples

Evaluating Research Proposals

Comparing proposals “apples-to-apples” is crucial to establishing which one will best meet your needs. Consider these ideas to help you focus on the details that contribute to a successful survey.

Make sure the proposal responds to your objectives.

The proposal process begins well before you ask any research firm for quote. The process really begins with the discussions you and your team have about objectives. What are your goals? What are the decisions you want to make when the project is done and you have data in hand?

Once you have a solid vision of the survey, then it’s time to start talking with potential partners Throughout your conversations, take note: Do the various firms ask you specific questions about your objectives, the group of people you’d like to survey, and your ultimate goals? Do they, indeed, ask about decisions that you wish to make? Details regarding your specific need should always be front and center during the conversations.

Sampling plan.

When reviewing the sampling plan, make sure the proposal mentions sample size, response rate estimates, number of responses, and maximum sampling error. If you’re unsure of the impact these figures have on the quality of your results, ask the researcher. They should be able to explain them in terms you can understand.

Questionnaire.

The quantity and types of information sought from respondents will impact cost. Quantity encompasses the number of questions and number of variables to process. Type refers to how the questions will be processed, the data entry involved and whether all or just some data will be cleaned.

No evaluation is complete until you know the approximate number and types of questions planned for the survey. The number of open-ended questions should be included as well because open-ended questions that capture verbatim responses can impact the response rate and possibly the price of your survey, especially if done by mail.

In addition, make sure the proposal clearly indicates who will develop the questionnaire content. Also, determine if it includes enough collaboration time to be sufficiently customized to meet your particular needs.

Data collection approach.

For online surveys paying attention to the data collection series and who is responsible for sending survey invitations. Multiple emails to sample members can encourage response. As well, the invitation process should be sensitive to data privacy issues such as those indicated by GDPR and others. Proposals for mailed surveys should clearly outline the data collection series and each component of the survey kit.

Data processing.

Any proposal you receive should highlight the steps the research company will take to make sure that the data is accurate and representative. Depending on the type of survey, checking logic, consistency, and outliers can take a significant amount of time. You must have some process noted to identify inconsistent answers for surveys that collect a significant amount of numerical data (salary survey, market studies, budget planning). Finally, some percentage of mailed surveys need to be verified for data entry accuracy.

A straightforward analysis of survey data can meet many objectives. In other cases, a multivariate statistical analysis will provide deeper insights to achieve your objectives— making results easier to use. If your objectives include learning about separate segments of your circulation, crosstabulations should be specified.

Deliverables.

A variety of reporting options exist for a survey. These include but are not limited to data tables, a summary of the results, in-depth analysis, and graphed presentations. As a result, you need to understand exactly what you’ll receive following your survey and in what format.

No surprises!

Make sure the proposal covers all the bases: what you need to do and provide, what the firm will do when they will do it and how much it will cost. There should be no surprises in what you need to supply. No “you need how much letterhead and envelopes?” a week before your survey is scheduled to mail. Review the price carefully and understand what it includes and doesn’t include. As with many things in life, you usually get what you pay for.

The Importance of Questionnaire Design

The Importance of Questionnaire Design Planning a survey requires many steps and decisions along the way: “How many people do I need to survey? How am I going to distribute the survey?” And, while people often figure out what questions they want to ask, many overlook the importance of expert, unbiased questionnaire design. When you […]

Will Color Printing Give Your Survey a Boost?

Will Color Printing Give Your Survey a Boost? Occasionally we are asked if color printing (versus black and white) is better to use as part of a survey mailing? Will this treatment generate more attention and ultimately a better response? Our Opinion: If you’re looking to use color to boost your survey’s response rate, it […]

How to write a research proposal?

Devika rani duggappa.

Author information
Copyright and License information

Address for correspondence: Dr. Devika Rani Duggappa, 314/2/5, Durganjali Nilaya, 1 st H Cross, 7 th Main, Subbanna Garden, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru - 560 040, Karnataka, India. E-mail: [email protected]

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Writing the proposal of a research work in the present era is a challenging task due to the constantly evolving trends in the qualitative research design and the need to incorporate medical advances into the methodology. The proposal is a detailed plan or ‘blueprint’ for the intended study, and once it is completed, the research project should flow smoothly. Even today, many of the proposals at post-graduate evaluation committees and application proposals for funding are substandard. A search was conducted with keywords such as research proposal, writing proposal and qualitative using search engines, namely, PubMed and Google Scholar, and an attempt has been made to provide broad guidelines for writing a scientifically appropriate research proposal.

Key words: Guidelines, proposal, qualitative, research

INTRODUCTION

A clean, well-thought-out proposal forms the backbone for the research itself and hence becomes the most important step in the process of conduct of research.[ 1 ] The objective of preparing a research proposal would be to obtain approvals from various committees including ethics committee [details under ‘Research methodology II’ section [ Table 1 ] in this issue of IJA) and to request for grants. However, there are very few universally accepted guidelines for preparation of a good quality research proposal. A search was performed with keywords such as research proposal, funding, qualitative and writing proposals using search engines, namely, PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus.

Five ‘C’s while writing a literature review

graphic file with name IJA-60-631-g001.jpg

BASIC REQUIREMENTS OF A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

A proposal needs to show how your work fits into what is already known about the topic and what new paradigm will it add to the literature, while specifying the question that the research will answer, establishing its significance, and the implications of the answer.[ 2 ] The proposal must be capable of convincing the evaluation committee about the credibility, achievability, practicality and reproducibility (repeatability) of the research design.[ 3 ] Four categories of audience with different expectations may be present in the evaluation committees, namely academic colleagues, policy-makers, practitioners and lay audiences who evaluate the research proposal. Tips for preparation of a good research proposal include; ‘be practical, be persuasive, make broader links, aim for crystal clarity and plan before you write’. A researcher must be balanced, with a realistic understanding of what can be achieved. Being persuasive implies that researcher must be able to convince other researchers, research funding agencies, educational institutions and supervisors that the research is worth getting approval. The aim of the researcher should be clearly stated in simple language that describes the research in a way that non-specialists can comprehend, without use of jargons. The proposal must not only demonstrate that it is based on an intelligent understanding of the existing literature but also show that the writer has thought about the time needed to conduct each stage of the research.[ 4 , 5 ]

CONTENTS OF A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

The contents or formats of a research proposal vary depending on the requirements of evaluation committee and are generally provided by the evaluation committee or the institution.

In general, a cover page should contain the (i) title of the proposal, (ii) name and affiliation of the researcher (principal investigator) and co-investigators, (iii) institutional affiliation (degree of the investigator and the name of institution where the study will be performed), details of contact such as phone numbers, E-mail id's and lines for signatures of investigators.

The main contents of the proposal may be presented under the following headings: (i) introduction, (ii) review of literature, (iii) aims and objectives, (iv) research design and methods, (v) ethical considerations, (vi) budget, (vii) appendices and (viii) citations.[ 4 ]

Introduction

It is also sometimes termed as ‘need for study’ or ‘abstract’. Introduction is an initial pitch of an idea; it sets the scene and puts the research in context.[ 6 ] The introduction should be designed to create interest in the reader about the topic and proposal. It should convey to the reader, what you want to do, what necessitates the study and your passion for the topic.[ 7 ] Some questions that can be used to assess the significance of the study are: (i) Who has an interest in the domain of inquiry? (ii) What do we already know about the topic? (iii) What has not been answered adequately in previous research and practice? (iv) How will this research add to knowledge, practice and policy in this area? Some of the evaluation committees, expect the last two questions, elaborated under a separate heading of ‘background and significance’.[ 8 ] Introduction should also contain the hypothesis behind the research design. If hypothesis cannot be constructed, the line of inquiry to be used in the research must be indicated.

Review of literature

It refers to all sources of scientific evidence pertaining to the topic in interest. In the present era of digitalisation and easy accessibility, there is an enormous amount of relevant data available, making it a challenge for the researcher to include all of it in his/her review.[ 9 ] It is crucial to structure this section intelligently so that the reader can grasp the argument related to your study in relation to that of other researchers, while still demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. It is preferable to summarise each article in a paragraph, highlighting the details pertinent to the topic of interest. The progression of review can move from the more general to the more focused studies, or a historical progression can be used to develop the story, without making it exhaustive.[ 1 ] Literature should include supporting data, disagreements and controversies. Five ‘C's may be kept in mind while writing a literature review[ 10 ] [ Table 1 ].

Aims and objectives

The research purpose (or goal or aim) gives a broad indication of what the researcher wishes to achieve in the research. The hypothesis to be tested can be the aim of the study. The objectives related to parameters or tools used to achieve the aim are generally categorised as primary and secondary objectives.

Research design and method

The objective here is to convince the reader that the overall research design and methods of analysis will correctly address the research problem and to impress upon the reader that the methodology/sources chosen are appropriate for the specific topic. It should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

In this section, the methods and sources used to conduct the research must be discussed, including specific references to sites, databases, key texts or authors that will be indispensable to the project. There should be specific mention about the methodological approaches to be undertaken to gather information, about the techniques to be used to analyse it and about the tests of external validity to which researcher is committed.[ 10 , 11 ]

The components of this section include the following:[ 4 ]

Population and sample

Population refers to all the elements (individuals, objects or substances) that meet certain criteria for inclusion in a given universe,[ 12 ] and sample refers to subset of population which meets the inclusion criteria for enrolment into the study. The inclusion and exclusion criteria should be clearly defined. The details pertaining to sample size are discussed in the article “Sample size calculation: Basic priniciples” published in this issue of IJA.

Data collection

The researcher is expected to give a detailed account of the methodology adopted for collection of data, which include the time frame required for the research. The methodology should be tested for its validity and ensure that, in pursuit of achieving the results, the participant's life is not jeopardised. The author should anticipate and acknowledge any potential barrier and pitfall in carrying out the research design and explain plans to address them, thereby avoiding lacunae due to incomplete data collection. If the researcher is planning to acquire data through interviews or questionnaires, copy of the questions used for the same should be attached as an annexure with the proposal.

Rigor (soundness of the research)

This addresses the strength of the research with respect to its neutrality, consistency and applicability. Rigor must be reflected throughout the proposal.

It refers to the robustness of a research method against bias. The author should convey the measures taken to avoid bias, viz. blinding and randomisation, in an elaborate way, thus ensuring that the result obtained from the adopted method is purely as chance and not influenced by other confounding variables.

Consistency

Consistency considers whether the findings will be consistent if the inquiry was replicated with the same participants and in a similar context. This can be achieved by adopting standard and universally accepted methods and scales.

Applicability

Applicability refers to the degree to which the findings can be applied to different contexts and groups.[ 13 ]

Data analysis

This section deals with the reduction and reconstruction of data and its analysis including sample size calculation. The researcher is expected to explain the steps adopted for coding and sorting the data obtained. Various tests to be used to analyse the data for its robustness, significance should be clearly stated. Author should also mention the names of statistician and suitable software which will be used in due course of data analysis and their contribution to data analysis and sample calculation.[ 9 ]

Ethical considerations

Medical research introduces special moral and ethical problems that are not usually encountered by other researchers during data collection, and hence, the researcher should take special care in ensuring that ethical standards are met. Ethical considerations refer to the protection of the participants' rights (right to self-determination, right to privacy, right to autonomy and confidentiality, right to fair treatment and right to protection from discomfort and harm), obtaining informed consent and the institutional review process (ethical approval). The researcher needs to provide adequate information on each of these aspects.

Informed consent needs to be obtained from the participants (details discussed in further chapters), as well as the research site and the relevant authorities.

When the researcher prepares a research budget, he/she should predict and cost all aspects of the research and then add an additional allowance for unpredictable disasters, delays and rising costs. All items in the budget should be justified.

Appendices are documents that support the proposal and application. The appendices will be specific for each proposal but documents that are usually required include informed consent form, supporting documents, questionnaires, measurement tools and patient information of the study in layman's language.

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used in composing your proposal. Although the words ‘references and bibliography’ are different, they are used interchangeably. It refers to all references cited in the research proposal.

Successful, qualitative research proposals should communicate the researcher's knowledge of the field and method and convey the emergent nature of the qualitative design. The proposal should follow a discernible logic from the introduction to presentation of the appendices.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

1. McGranaghan M. Guidelines on Writing a Research Proposal. [Last accessed on 2016 Jun 25]. Available from: https://www.2.hawaii.edu/~matt/proposal.html .
2. Nte AR, Awi DD. Research proposal writing: Breaking the myth. Niger J Med. 2006;15:373–81. doi: 10.4314/njm.v15i4.37249. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
3. Saunderlin G. Writing a research proposal: The critical first step for successful clinical research. Gastroenterol Nurs. 1994;17:48–56. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
4. Klopper H. The qualitative research proposal. Curationis. 2008;31:62–72. doi: 10.4102/curationis.v31i4.1062. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
5. Singh MD, Cameron C, Duff D. Writing proposals for research funds. Axone. 2005;26:26–30. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
6. Burns N, Grove SK. The Practice of Nursing Research: Conduct, Critique and Utilization. 5th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders; 2005. pp. 667–8. [ Google Scholar ]
7. Sandelowski M, Barroso J. Writing the proposal for a qualitative research methodology project. Qual Health Res. 2003;13:781–820. doi: 10.1177/1049732303013006003. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
8. Krathwohl DR. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press; 2005. pp. 45–7. [ Google Scholar ]
9. Balakumar P, Inamdar MN, Jagadeesh G. The Critical Steps for Successful Research: The Research Proposal and Scientific Writing: A Report on the Pre-Conference Workshop Held in Conjunction with the 64th Annual Conference of the Indian Pharmaceutical Congress-2012. J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2013;4:130–18. doi: 10.4103/0976-500X.110895. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
10. Labaree RV. Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Writing a Research Proposal. [Last accessed on 2016 Jun 25]. Available from: http://www.libguides.usc.edu/writingguide .
11. Research Proposal. [Last accessed on 2016 Jul 04]. Available from: http://www.web.stanford.edu/~steener/gendertech/assignments/ResearchProposal.pdf .
12. Burns N, Grove SK. The Practice of Nursing Research: Conduct, Critique and Utilization. 5th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders; 2005. p. 40. [ Google Scholar ]
13. Sliep Y, Poggenpoel M, Gmeiner A. A care counselling model for HIV reactive patients in rural Malawi – Part II. Curationis. 2001;24:66–74. doi: 10.4102/curationis.v24i3.855. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
View on publisher site
PDF (372.3 KB)
Collections

Add to Collections

How to Write a Research Proposal: (with Examples & Templates)

Table of Contents

Before conducting a study, a research proposal should be created that outlines researchers’ plans and methodology and is submitted to the concerned evaluating organization or person. Creating a research proposal is an important step to ensure that researchers are on track and are moving forward as intended. A research proposal can be defined as a detailed plan or blueprint for the proposed research that you intend to undertake. It provides readers with a snapshot of your project by describing what you will investigate, why it is needed, and how you will conduct the research.

Your research proposal should aim to explain to the readers why your research is relevant and original, that you understand the context and current scenario in the field, have the appropriate resources to conduct the research, and that the research is feasible given the usual constraints.

This article will describe in detail the purpose and typical structure of a research proposal , along with examples and templates to help you ace this step in your research journey.

What is a Research Proposal ?

A research proposal¹ ,² can be defined as a formal report that describes your proposed research, its objectives, methodology, implications, and other important details. Research proposals are the framework of your research and are used to obtain approvals or grants to conduct the study from various committees or organizations. Consequently, research proposals should convince readers of your study’s credibility, accuracy, achievability, practicality, and reproducibility.

With research proposals , researchers usually aim to persuade the readers, funding agencies, educational institutions, and supervisors to approve the proposal. To achieve this, the report should be well structured with the objectives written in clear, understandable language devoid of jargon. A well-organized research proposal conveys to the readers or evaluators that the writer has thought out the research plan meticulously and has the resources to ensure timely completion.

Purpose of Research Proposals

A research proposal is a sales pitch and therefore should be detailed enough to convince your readers, who could be supervisors, ethics committees, universities, etc., that what you’re proposing has merit and is feasible . Research proposals can help students discuss their dissertation with their faculty or fulfill course requirements and also help researchers obtain funding. A well-structured proposal instills confidence among readers about your ability to conduct and complete the study as proposed.

Research proposals can be written for several reasons:³

To describe the importance of research in the specific topic
Address any potential challenges you may encounter
Showcase knowledge in the field and your ability to conduct a study
Apply for a role at a research institute
Convince a research supervisor or university that your research can satisfy the requirements of a degree program
Highlight the importance of your research to organizations that may sponsor your project
Identify implications of your project and how it can benefit the audience

What Goes in a Research Proposal?

Research proposals should aim to answer the three basic questions—what, why, and how.

The What question should be answered by describing the specific subject being researched. It should typically include the objectives, the cohort details, and the location or setting.

The Why question should be answered by describing the existing scenario of the subject, listing unanswered questions, identifying gaps in the existing research, and describing how your study can address these gaps, along with the implications and significance.

The How question should be answered by describing the proposed research methodology, data analysis tools expected to be used, and other details to describe your proposed methodology.

Research Proposal Example

Here is a research proposal sample template (with examples) from the University of Rochester Medical Center. 4 The sections in all research proposals are essentially the same although different terminology and other specific sections may be used depending on the subject.

Structure of a Research Proposal

If you want to know how to make a research proposal impactful, include the following components:¹

1. Introduction

This section provides a background of the study, including the research topic, what is already known about it and the gaps, and the significance of the proposed research.

2. Literature review

This section contains descriptions of all the previous relevant studies pertaining to the research topic. Every study cited should be described in a few sentences, starting with the general studies to the more specific ones. This section builds on the understanding gained by readers in the Introduction section and supports it by citing relevant prior literature, indicating to readers that you have thoroughly researched your subject.

3. Objectives

Once the background and gaps in the research topic have been established, authors must now state the aims of the research clearly. Hypotheses should be mentioned here. This section further helps readers understand what your study’s specific goals are.

4. Research design and methodology

Here, authors should clearly describe the methods they intend to use to achieve their proposed objectives. Important components of this section include the population and sample size, data collection and analysis methods and duration, statistical analysis software, measures to avoid bias (randomization, blinding), etc.

5. Ethical considerations

This refers to the protection of participants’ rights, such as the right to privacy, right to confidentiality, etc. Researchers need to obtain informed consent and institutional review approval by the required authorities and mention this clearly for transparency.

6. Budget/funding

Researchers should prepare their budget and include all expected expenditures. An additional allowance for contingencies such as delays should also be factored in.

7. Appendices

This section typically includes information that supports the research proposal and may include informed consent forms, questionnaires, participant information, measurement tools, etc.

8. Citations

Important Tips for Writing a Research Proposal

Writing a research proposal begins much before the actual task of writing. Planning the research proposal structure and content is an important stage, which if done efficiently, can help you seamlessly transition into the writing stage. 3,5

The Planning Stage

Manage your time efficiently. Plan to have the draft version ready at least two weeks before your deadline and the final version at least two to three days before the deadline.
What is the primary objective of your research?
Will your research address any existing gap?
What is the impact of your proposed research?
Do people outside your field find your research applicable in other areas?
If your research is unsuccessful, would there still be other useful research outcomes?

The Writing Stage

Create an outline with main section headings that are typically used.
Focus only on writing and getting your points across without worrying about the format of the research proposal , grammar, punctuation, etc. These can be fixed during the subsequent passes. Add details to each section heading you created in the beginning.
Ensure your sentences are concise and use plain language. A research proposal usually contains about 2,000 to 4,000 words or four to seven pages.
Don’t use too many technical terms and abbreviations assuming that the readers would know them. Define the abbreviations and technical terms.
Ensure that the entire content is readable. Avoid using long paragraphs because they affect the continuity in reading. Break them into shorter paragraphs and introduce some white space for readability.
Focus on only the major research issues and cite sources accordingly. Don’t include generic information or their sources in the literature review.
Proofread your final document to ensure there are no grammatical errors so readers can enjoy a seamless, uninterrupted read.
Use academic, scholarly language because it brings formality into a document.
Ensure that your title is created using the keywords in the document and is neither too long and specific nor too short and general.
Cite all sources appropriately to avoid plagiarism.
Make sure that you follow guidelines, if provided. This includes rules as simple as using a specific font or a hyphen or en dash between numerical ranges.
Ensure that you’ve answered all questions requested by the evaluating authority.

Key Takeaways

Here’s a summary of the main points about research proposals discussed in the previous sections:

A research proposal is a document that outlines the details of a proposed study and is created by researchers to submit to evaluators who could be research institutions, universities, faculty, etc.
Research proposals are usually about 2,000-4,000 words long, but this depends on the evaluating authority’s guidelines.
A good research proposal ensures that you’ve done your background research and assessed the feasibility of the research.
Research proposals have the following main sections—introduction, literature review, objectives, methodology, ethical considerations, and budget.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. How is a research proposal evaluated?

A1. In general, most evaluators, including universities, broadly use the following criteria to evaluate research proposals . 6

Significance —Does the research address any important subject or issue, which may or may not be specific to the evaluator or university?
Content and design —Is the proposed methodology appropriate to answer the research question? Are the objectives clear and well aligned with the proposed methodology?
Sample size and selection —Is the target population or cohort size clearly mentioned? Is the sampling process used to select participants randomized, appropriate, and free of bias?
Timing —Are the proposed data collection dates mentioned clearly? Is the project feasible given the specified resources and timeline?
Data management and dissemination —Who will have access to the data? What is the plan for data analysis?

Q2. What is the difference between the Introduction and Literature Review sections in a research proposal ?

A2. The Introduction or Background section in a research proposal sets the context of the study by describing the current scenario of the subject and identifying the gaps and need for the research. A Literature Review, on the other hand, provides references to all prior relevant literature to help corroborate the gaps identified and the research need.

Q3. How long should a research proposal be?

A3. Research proposal lengths vary with the evaluating authority like universities or committees and also the subject. Here’s a table that lists the typical research proposal lengths for a few universities.

Q4. What are the common mistakes to avoid in a research proposal ?

A4. Here are a few common mistakes that you must avoid while writing a research proposal . 7

No clear objectives: Objectives should be clear, specific, and measurable for the easy understanding among readers.
Incomplete or unconvincing background research: Background research usually includes a review of the current scenario of the particular industry and also a review of the previous literature on the subject. This helps readers understand your reasons for undertaking this research because you identified gaps in the existing research.
Overlooking project feasibility: The project scope and estimates should be realistic considering the resources and time available.
Neglecting the impact and significance of the study: In a research proposal , readers and evaluators look for the implications or significance of your research and how it contributes to the existing research. This information should always be included.
Unstructured format of a research proposal : A well-structured document gives confidence to evaluators that you have read the guidelines carefully and are well organized in your approach, consequently affirming that you will be able to undertake the research as mentioned in your proposal.
Ineffective writing style: The language used should be formal and grammatically correct. If required, editors could be consulted, including AI-based tools such as Paperpal , to refine the research proposal structure and language.

Thus, a research proposal is an essential document that can help you promote your research and secure funds and grants for conducting your research. Consequently, it should be well written in clear language and include all essential details to convince the evaluators of your ability to conduct the research as proposed.

This article has described all the important components of a research proposal and has also provided tips to improve your writing style. We hope all these tips will help you write a well-structured research proposal to ensure receipt of grants or any other purpose.

References

Sudheesh K, Duggappa DR, Nethra SS. How to write a research proposal? Indian J Anaesth. 2016;60(9):631-634. Accessed July 15, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5037942/
Writing research proposals. Harvard College Office of Undergraduate Research and Fellowships. Harvard University. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://uraf.harvard.edu/apply-opportunities/app-components/essays/research-proposals
What is a research proposal? Plus how to write one. Indeed website. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/research-proposal
Research proposal template. University of Rochester Medical Center. Accessed July 16, 2024. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/MediaLibraries/URMCMedia/pediatrics/research/documents/Research-proposal-Template.pdf
Tips for successful proposal writing. Johns Hopkins University. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://research.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Tips-for-Successful-Proposal-Writing.pdf
Formal review of research proposals. Cornell University. Accessed July 18, 2024. https://irp.dpb.cornell.edu/surveys/survey-assessment-review-group/research-proposals
7 Mistakes you must avoid in your research proposal. Aveksana (via LinkedIn). Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/7-mistakes-you-must-avoid-your-research-proposal-aveksana-cmtwf/

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!

How to Write Your Research Paper in APA Format

The future of academia: how ai tools are changing the way we do research, you may also like, what is the purpose of an abstract why..., what are citation styles which citation style to..., what are the types of literature reviews , abstract vs introduction: what is the difference , mla format: guidelines, template and examples , machine translation vs human translation: which is reliable..., dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic.

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

Annotated Bibliography
Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
Group Presentations
Dealing with Nervousness
Using Visual Aids
Grading Someone Else's Paper
Types of Structured Group Activities
Group Project Survival Skills
Leading a Class Discussion
Multiple Book Review Essay
Reviewing Collected Works
Writing a Case Analysis Paper
Writing a Case Study
About Informed Consent
Writing Field Notes
Writing a Policy Memo
Writing a Reflective Paper
Writing a Research Proposal
Generative AI and Writing
Acknowledgments

The goal of a research proposal is twofold: to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. The design elements and procedures for conducting research are governed by standards of the predominant discipline in which the problem resides, therefore, the guidelines for research proposals are more exacting and less formal than a general project proposal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews. They must provide persuasive evidence that a need exists for the proposed study. In addition to providing a rationale, a proposal describes detailed methodology for conducting the research consistent with requirements of the professional or academic field and a statement on anticipated outcomes and benefits derived from the study's completion.

Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005.

How to Approach Writing a Research Proposal

Your professor may assign the task of writing a research proposal for the following reasons:

Develop your skills in thinking about and designing a comprehensive research study;
Learn how to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature to determine that the research problem has not been adequately addressed or has been answered ineffectively and, in so doing, become better at locating pertinent scholarship related to your topic;
Improve your general research and writing skills;
Practice identifying the logical steps that must be taken to accomplish one's research goals;
Critically review, examine, and consider the use of different methods for gathering and analyzing data related to the research problem; and,
Nurture a sense of inquisitiveness within yourself and to help see yourself as an active participant in the process of conducting scholarly research.

A proposal should contain all the key elements involved in designing a completed research study, with sufficient information that allows readers to assess the validity and usefulness of your proposed study. The only elements missing from a research proposal are the findings of the study and your analysis of those findings. Finally, an effective proposal is judged on the quality of your writing and, therefore, it is important that your proposal is coherent, clear, and compelling.

Regardless of the research problem you are investigating and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the following questions:

What do you plan to accomplish? Be clear and succinct in defining the research problem and what it is you are proposing to investigate.
Why do you want to do the research? In addition to detailing your research design, you also must conduct a thorough review of the literature and provide convincing evidence that it is a topic worthy of in-depth study. A successful research proposal must answer the "So What?" question.
How are you going to conduct the research? Be sure that what you propose is doable. If you're having difficulty formulating a research problem to propose investigating, go here for strategies in developing a problem to study.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Failure to be concise . A research proposal must be focused and not be "all over the map" or diverge into unrelated tangents without a clear sense of purpose.
Failure to cite landmark works in your literature review . Proposals should be grounded in foundational research that lays a foundation for understanding the development and scope of the the topic and its relevance.
Failure to delimit the contextual scope of your research [e.g., time, place, people, etc.]. As with any research paper, your proposed study must inform the reader how and in what ways the study will frame the problem.
Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research . This is critical. In many workplace settings, the research proposal is a formal document intended to argue for why a study should be funded.
Sloppy or imprecise writing, or poor grammar . Although a research proposal does not represent a completed research study, there is still an expectation that it is well-written and follows the style and rules of good academic writing.
Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues . Your proposal should focus on only a few key research questions in order to support the argument that the research needs to be conducted. Minor issues, even if valid, can be mentioned but they should not dominate the overall narrative.

Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Sanford, Keith. Information for Students: Writing a Research Proposal. Baylor University; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences, Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Structure and Writing Style

Beginning the Proposal Process

As with writing most college-level academic papers, research proposals are generally organized the same way throughout most social science disciplines. The text of proposals generally vary in length between ten and thirty-five pages, followed by the list of references. However, before you begin, read the assignment carefully and, if anything seems unclear, ask your professor whether there are any specific requirements for organizing and writing the proposal.

A good place to begin is to ask yourself a series of questions:

What do I want to study?
Why is the topic important?
How is it significant within the subject areas covered in my class?
What problems will it help solve?
How does it build upon [and hopefully go beyond] research already conducted on the topic?
What exactly should I plan to do, and can I get it done in the time available?

In general, a compelling research proposal should document your knowledge of the topic and demonstrate your enthusiasm for conducting the study. Approach it with the intention of leaving your readers feeling like, "Wow, that's an exciting idea and I can’t wait to see how it turns out!"

Most proposals should include the following sections:

I. Introduction

In the real world of higher education, a research proposal is most often written by scholars seeking grant funding for a research project or it's the first step in getting approval to write a doctoral dissertation. Even if this is just a course assignment, treat your introduction as the initial pitch of an idea based on a thorough examination of the significance of a research problem. After reading the introduction, your readers should not only have an understanding of what you want to do, but they should also be able to gain a sense of your passion for the topic and to be excited about the study's possible outcomes. Note that most proposals do not include an abstract [summary] before the introduction.

Think about your introduction as a narrative written in two to four paragraphs that succinctly answers the following four questions :

What is the central research problem?
What is the topic of study related to that research problem?
What methods should be used to analyze the research problem?
Answer the "So What?" question by explaining why this is important research, what is its significance, and why should someone reading the proposal care about the outcomes of the proposed study?

II. Background and Significance

This is where you explain the scope and context of your proposal and describe in detail why it's important. It can be melded into your introduction or you can create a separate section to help with the organization and narrative flow of your proposal. Approach writing this section with the thought that you can’t assume your readers will know as much about the research problem as you do. Note that this section is not an essay going over everything you have learned about the topic; instead, you must choose what is most relevant in explaining the aims of your research.

To that end, while there are no prescribed rules for establishing the significance of your proposed study, you should attempt to address some or all of the following:

State the research problem and give a more detailed explanation about the purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction. This is particularly important if the problem is complex or multifaceted .
Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing; be sure to answer the "So What? question [i.e., why should anyone care?].
Describe the major issues or problems examined by your research. This can be in the form of questions to be addressed. Be sure to note how your proposed study builds on previous assumptions about the research problem.
Explain the methods you plan to use for conducting your research. Clearly identify the key sources you intend to use and explain how they will contribute to your analysis of the topic.
Describe the boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a clear focus. Where appropriate, state not only what you plan to study, but what aspects of the research problem will be excluded from the study.
If necessary, provide definitions of key concepts, theories, or terms.

III. Literature Review

Connected to the background and significance of your study is a section of your proposal devoted to a more deliberate review and synthesis of prior studies related to the research problem under investigation . The purpose here is to place your project within the larger whole of what is currently being explored, while at the same time, demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. Think about what questions other researchers have asked, what methodological approaches they have used, and what is your understanding of their findings and, when stated, their recommendations. Also pay attention to any suggestions for further research.

Since a literature review is information dense, it is crucial that this section is intelligently structured to enable a reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your proposed study in relation to the arguments put forth by other researchers. A good strategy is to break the literature into "conceptual categories" [themes] rather than systematically or chronologically describing groups of materials one at a time. Note that conceptual categories generally reveal themselves after you have read most of the pertinent literature on your topic so adding new categories is an on-going process of discovery as you review more studies. How do you know you've covered the key conceptual categories underlying the research literature? Generally, you can have confidence that all of the significant conceptual categories have been identified if you start to see repetition in the conclusions or recommendations that are being made.

NOTE: Do not shy away from challenging the conclusions made in prior research as a basis for supporting the need for your proposal. Assess what you believe is missing and state how previous research has failed to adequately examine the issue that your study addresses. Highlighting the problematic conclusions strengthens your proposal. For more information on writing literature reviews, GO HERE .

To help frame your proposal's review of prior research, consider the "five C’s" of writing a literature review:

Cite , so as to keep the primary focus on the literature pertinent to your research problem.
Compare the various arguments, theories, methodologies, and findings expressed in the literature: what do the authors agree on? Who applies similar approaches to analyzing the research problem?
Contrast the various arguments, themes, methodologies, approaches, and controversies expressed in the literature: describe what are the major areas of disagreement, controversy, or debate among scholars?
Critique the literature: Which arguments are more persuasive, and why? Which approaches, findings, and methodologies seem most reliable, valid, or appropriate, and why? Pay attention to the verbs you use to describe what an author says/does [e.g., asserts, demonstrates, argues, etc.].
Connect the literature to your own area of research and investigation: how does your own work draw upon, depart from, synthesize, or add a new perspective to what has been said in the literature?

IV. Research Design and Methods

This section must be well-written and logically organized because you are not actually doing the research, yet, your reader must have confidence that you have a plan worth pursuing . The reader will never have a study outcome from which to evaluate whether your methodological choices were the correct ones. Thus, the objective here is to convince the reader that your overall research design and proposed methods of analysis will correctly address the problem and that the methods will provide the means to effectively interpret the potential results. Your design and methods should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

Describe the overall research design by building upon and drawing examples from your review of the literature. Consider not only methods that other researchers have used, but methods of data gathering that have not been used but perhaps could be. Be specific about the methodological approaches you plan to undertake to obtain information, the techniques you would use to analyze the data, and the tests of external validity to which you commit yourself [i.e., the trustworthiness by which you can generalize from your study to other people, places, events, and/or periods of time].

When describing the methods you will use, be sure to cover the following:

Specify the research process you will undertake and the way you will interpret the results obtained in relation to the research problem. Don't just describe what you intend to achieve from applying the methods you choose, but state how you will spend your time while applying these methods [e.g., coding text from interviews to find statements about the need to change school curriculum; running a regression to determine if there is a relationship between campaign advertising on social media sites and election outcomes in Europe ].
Keep in mind that the methodology is not just a list of tasks; it is a deliberate argument as to why techniques for gathering information add up to the best way to investigate the research problem. This is an important point because the mere listing of tasks to be performed does not demonstrate that, collectively, they effectively address the research problem. Be sure you clearly explain this.
Anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers and pitfalls in carrying out your research design and explain how you plan to address them. No method applied to research in the social and behavioral sciences is perfect, so you need to describe where you believe challenges may exist in obtaining data or accessing information. It's always better to acknowledge this than to have it brought up by your professor!

V. Preliminary Suppositions and Implications

Just because you don't have to actually conduct the study and analyze the results, doesn't mean you can skip talking about the analytical process and potential implications . The purpose of this section is to argue how and in what ways you believe your research will refine, revise, or extend existing knowledge in the subject area under investigation. Depending on the aims and objectives of your study, describe how the anticipated results will impact future scholarly research, theory, practice, forms of interventions, or policy making. Note that such discussions may have either substantive [a potential new policy], theoretical [a potential new understanding], or methodological [a potential new way of analyzing] significance. When thinking about the potential implications of your study, ask the following questions:

What might the results mean in regards to challenging the theoretical framework and underlying assumptions that support the study?
What suggestions for subsequent research could arise from the potential outcomes of the study?
What will the results mean to practitioners in the natural settings of their workplace, organization, or community?
Will the results influence programs, methods, and/or forms of intervention?
How might the results contribute to the solution of social, economic, or other types of problems?
Will the results influence policy decisions?
In what way do individuals or groups benefit should your study be pursued?
What will be improved or changed as a result of the proposed research?
How will the results of the study be implemented and what innovations or transformative insights could emerge from the process of implementation?

NOTE: This section should not delve into idle speculation, opinion, or be formulated on the basis of unclear evidence . The purpose is to reflect upon gaps or understudied areas of the current literature and describe how your proposed research contributes to a new understanding of the research problem should the study be implemented as designed.

ANOTHER NOTE : This section is also where you describe any potential limitations to your proposed study. While it is impossible to highlight all potential limitations because the study has yet to be conducted, you still must tell the reader where and in what form impediments may arise and how you plan to address them.

VI. Conclusion

The conclusion reiterates the importance or significance of your proposal and provides a brief summary of the entire study . This section should be only one or two paragraphs long, emphasizing why the research problem is worth investigating, why your research study is unique, and how it should advance existing knowledge.

Someone reading this section should come away with an understanding of:

Why the study should be done;
The specific purpose of the study and the research questions it attempts to answer;
The decision for why the research design and methods used where chosen over other options;
The potential implications emerging from your proposed study of the research problem; and
A sense of how your study fits within the broader scholarship about the research problem.

VII. Citations

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used . In a standard research proposal, this section can take two forms, so consult with your professor about which one is preferred.

References -- a list of only the sources you actually used in creating your proposal.
Bibliography -- a list of everything you used in creating your proposal, along with additional citations to any key sources relevant to understanding the research problem.

In either case, this section should testify to the fact that you did enough preparatory work to ensure the project will complement and not just duplicate the efforts of other researchers. It demonstrates to the reader that you have a thorough understanding of prior research on the topic.

Most proposal formats have you start a new page and use the heading "References" or "Bibliography" centered at the top of the page. Cited works should always use a standard format that follows the writing style advised by the discipline of your course [e.g., education=APA; history=Chicago] or that is preferred by your professor. This section normally does not count towards the total page length of your research proposal.

Develop a Research Proposal: Writing the Proposal. Office of Library Information Services. Baltimore County Public Schools; Heath, M. Teresa Pereira and Caroline Tynan. “Crafting a Research Proposal.” The Marketing Review 10 (Summer 2010): 147-168; Jones, Mark. “Writing a Research Proposal.” In MasterClass in Geography Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning . Graham Butt, editor. (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015), pp. 113-127; Juni, Muhamad Hanafiah. “Writing a Research Proposal.” International Journal of Public Health and Clinical Sciences 1 (September/October 2014): 229-240; Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005; Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Punch, Keith and Wayne McGowan. "Developing and Writing a Research Proposal." In From Postgraduate to Social Scientist: A Guide to Key Skills . Nigel Gilbert, ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006), 59-81; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences , Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

<< Previous: Writing a Reflective Paper
Next: Generative AI and Writing >>
Last Updated: Nov 13, 2024 9:40 AM
URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

Research Evaluation

First Online: 23 June 2020

Cite this chapter

Carlo Ghezzi 2

1075 Accesses

1 Citations

The original version of this chapter was revised. A correction to this chapter can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45157-8_7

This chapter is about research evaluation. Evaluation is quintessential to research. It is traditionally performed through qualitative expert judgement. The chapter presents the main evaluation activities in which researchers can be engaged. It also introduces the current efforts towards devising quantitative research evaluation based on bibliometric indicators and critically discusses their limitations, along with their possible (limited and careful) use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime
Available as EPUB and PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Change history

19 october 2021.

The original version of the chapter was inadvertently published with an error. The chapter has now been corrected.

Notice that the taxonomy presented in Box 5.1 does not cover all kinds of scientific papers. As an example, it does not cover survey papers, which normally are not submitted to a conference.

Private institutions and industry may follow different schemes.

Adler, R., Ewing, J., Taylor, P.: Citation statistics: A report from the international mathematical union (imu) in cooperation with the international council of industrial and applied mathematics (iciam) and the institute of mathematical statistics (ims). Statistical Science 24 (1), 1–14 (2009). URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/20697661

Esposito, F., Ghezzi, C., Hermenegildo, M., Kirchner, H., Ong, L.: Informatics Research Evaluation. Informatics Europe (2018). URL https://www.informatics-europe.org/publications.html

Friedman, B., Schneider, F.B.: Incentivizing quality and impact: Evaluating scholarship in hiring, tenure, and promotion. Computing Research Association (2016). URL https://cra.org/resources/best-practice-memos/incentivizing-quality-and-impact-evaluating-scholarship-in-hiring-tenure-and-promotion/

Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., Rafols, I.: Bibliometrics: The leiden manifesto for research metrics. Nature News 520 (7548), 429 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a . URL http://www.nature.com/news/bibliometrics-the-leiden-manifesto-for-research-metrics-1.17351

Parnas, D.L.: Stop the numbers game. Commun. ACM 50 (11), 19–21 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1145/1297797.1297815 . URL http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1297797.1297815

Patterson, D., Snyder, L., Ullman, J.: Evaluating computer scientists and engineers for promotion and tenure. Computing Research Association (1999). URL https://cra.org/resources/best-practice-memos/incentivizing-quality-and-impact-evaluating-scholarship-in-hiring-tenure-and-promotion/

Saenen, B., Borrell-Damian, L.: Reflections on University Research Assessment: key concepts, issues and actors. European University Association (2019). URL https://eua.eu/component/attachments/attachments.html?id=2144

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy

Carlo Ghezzi

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlo Ghezzi .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Ghezzi, C. (2020). Research Evaluation. In: Being a Researcher. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45157-8_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45157-8_5

Published : 23 June 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-45156-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-45157-8

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (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

LBST 2301 (SOCY): Critical Thinking & Communication - Karen Cushing

How to Develop a Research Question
Writing a Research Proposal
Popular vs. Scholarly Resources
Annotated Bibliography
Citing Your Sources

Tips on Preparing a Research Proposal

Common mistakes to avoid.

Failure to be concise. A research proposal must be focused and not be "all over the map" or diverge into on unrelated tangents without a clear sense of purpose.
Failure to cite landmark works in your literature review. Proposals should be grounded in foundational research that lays a foundation for understanding the development and scope of the issue.
Failure to delimit the contextual boundaries of your research [e.g., time, place, people, etc.]. As with any research paper, your proposed study must inform the reader how and in what ways the study will examine the problem.
Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research . This is critical. In many workplace settings, the research proposal is intended to argue for why a study should be funded.
Sloppy or imprecise writing, or poor grammar. Although a research proposal does not represent a completed research study, there is still an expectation that it is well-written and follows the style and rules of good academic writing.
Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues. Your proposal should focus on only a few key research questions in order to support the argument that the research needs to be conducted. Minor issues, even if valid, can be mentioned but they should not dominate the overall narrative.

--------------------------------------

Adapted from "Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper," USC Libraries, University of Southern California, <https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/researchproposal>, accessed 4 Feb.. 2022.

Research Proposals

What is a Research Proposal

A research proposal is simply a structured, formal document that explains what you plan to research (i.e. your research topic), why it’s worth r esearching (i.e. your justification), and how you plan to investigate it (i.e. your practical approach).

The purpose of the research proposal (it’s job, so to speak) is to convince your research supervisor, committee or university that your research is suitable (for the requirements of the degree program) and manageable (given the time and resource constraints you will face).

The most important word here is “ convince ” – in other words, your research proposal needs to sell your research idea (to whoever is going to approve it). If it doesn’t convince them (of its suitability and manageability), you’ll need to revise and resubmit. This will cost you valuable time, which will either delay the start of your research or eat into its time allowance (which is bad news).

Research proposals generally follow the same format as a research paper, with an introduction, a literature review, a discussion of research methodology and goals, and a conclusion.

From: Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal . International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University

Components of a Research Proposal

Introduction.

The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project, so make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why. It should:

Introduce the topic
Give background and context
Outline your t problem statement and research question(s)

Some important questions to guide your introduction include:

Who has an interest in the topic (e.g. scientists, practitioners, policymakers, particular members of society)?
How much is already known about the problem?
What is missing from current knowledge?
What new insights will your research contribute?
Why is this research worth doing?

If your proposal is very long, you might include separate sections with more detailed information on the background and context, problem statement, aims and objectives, and importance of the research.

Literature review

It’s important to show that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review convinces the reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said.

In this section, aim to demonstrate exactly how your project will contribute to conversations in the field.

Compare and contrast: what are the main theories, methods, debates and controversies?
Be critical: what are the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches?
Show how your research fits in: how will you build on, challenge, or synthesize the work of others?

The literature review serves several important functions:

Ensures that you are not "reinventing the wheel".
Gives credits to those who have laid the groundwork for your research.
Demonstrates your knowledge of the research problem.
Demonstrates your understanding of the theoretical and research issues related to your research question.
Shows your ability to critically evaluate relevant literature information.
Indicates your ability to integrate and synthesize the existing literature.
Provides new theoretical insights or develops a new model as the conceptual framework for your research.
Convinces your reader that your proposed research will make a significant and substantial contribution to the literature (i.e., resolving an important theoretical issue or filling a major gap in the literature).

The purpose of the discussion is to interpret and describe the significance of your findings in light of what was already known about the research problem being investigated, and to explain any new understanding or fresh insights about the problem after you've taken the findings into consideration. The discussion will always connect to the introduction by way of the research questions or hypotheses you posed and the literature you reviewed, but it does not simply repeat or rearrange the introduction; the discussion should always explain how your study has moved the reader's understanding of the research problem forward from where you left them at the end of the introduction.

This section is often considered the most important part of a research paper because it most effectively demonstrates your ability as a researcher to think critically about an issue, to develop creative solutions to problems based on the findings, and to formulate a deeper, more profound understanding of the research problem you are studying.

The discussion section is where you explore the underlying meaning of your research , its possible implications in other areas of study, and the possible improvements that can be made in order to further develop the concerns of your research.

This is the section where you need to present the importance of your study and how it may be able to contribute to and/or fill existing gaps in the field. If appropriate, the discussion section is also where you state how the findings from your study revealed new gaps in the literature that had not been previously exposed or adequately described.

This part of the paper is not strictly governed by objective reporting of information but, rather, it is where you can engage in creative thinking about issues through evidence-based interpretation of findings. This is where you infuse your results with meaning.

Kretchmer, Paul. Fourteen Steps to Writing to Writing an Effective Discussion Section . San Francisco Edit, 2003-2008.

The conclusion is intended to help the reader understand why your research should matter to them after they have finished reading the paper. A conclusion is not merely a summary of your points or a re-statement of your research problem but a synthesis of key points. For most essays, one well-developed paragraph is sufficient for a conclusion, although in some cases, a two-or-three paragraph conclusion may be required.

A well-written conclusion provides you with several important opportunities to demonstrate your overall understanding of the research problem to the reader. These include:

Presenting the last word on the issues you raised in your paper . Just as the introduction gives a first impression to your reader, the conclusion offers a chance to leave a lasting impression. Do this, for example, by highlighting key points in your analysis or findings.
Summarizing your thoughts and conveying the larger implications of your study . The conclusion is an opportunity to succinctly answer the "so what?" question by placing the study within the context of past research about the topic you've investigated.
Demonstrating the importance of your ideas . Don't be shy. The conclusion offers you a chance to elaborate on the significance of your findings.
Introducing possible new or expanded ways of thinking about the research problem . This does not refer to introducing new information [which should be avoided], but to offer new insight and creative approaches for framing/contextualizing the research problem based on the results of your study.

Conclusions . The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Kretchmer, Paul. Twelve Steps to Writing an Effective Conclusion . San Francisco Edit, 2003-2008.

<< Previous: How to Develop a Research Question
Next: Popular vs. Scholarly Resources >>
Last Updated: Oct 23, 2024 10:24 AM
URL: https://guides.library.charlotte.edu/c.php?g=1218501

IMAGES

How to Write a Research Proposal: Guide, Template & Examples
17 Research Proposal Examples (2024)
How to Write a Research Proposal: Guide, Template & Examples
Writing a Research Proposal as a Part of Academic Work
9 Free Research Proposal Templates (with Examples)
How to write a good research proposal (in 9 steps)

VIDEO

Informational Webinar
How to make Research Proposal for PhD admission?
how to write a research proposal
How to write a Research Proposal?
Education Webinar
Explain Research in 3 Ways Pt1

COMMENTS

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and Methods
Step 1: Understand the Research Context. Identify the Purpose: Determine the study’s objectives and research questions. Contextual Relevance: Evaluate the study’s relevance to current knowledge, theory, or practice. Example: For a study examining the effects of social media on mental health, assess whether the study addresses an important ...
How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates - Scribbr
Research proposal examples. Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below. Example research proposal #1: “A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management”.
Evaluating Research Proposals
Comparing proposals “apples-to-apples” is crucial to establishing which one will best meet your needs. Consider these ideas to help you focus on the details that contribute to a successful survey. Make sure the proposal responds to your objectives. The proposal process begins well before you ask any research firm for quote.
How to write a research proposal? - PMC - PubMed Central (PMC)
A proposal needs to show how your work fits into what is already known about the topic and what new paradigm will it add to the literature, while specifying the question that the research will answer, establishing its significance, and the implications of the answer. [2] The proposal must be capable of convincing the evaluation committee about ...
How to Write a Research Proposal: (with Examples & Templates)
Add details to each section heading you created in the beginning. Ensure your sentences are concise and use plain language. A research proposal usually contains about 2,000 to 4,000 words or four to seven pages. Don’t use too many technical terms and abbreviations assuming that the readers would know them.
Evaluation of research proposals: the why and what of the ERC ...
c excellence. Research evaluation is therefore at the heart of its operations. Recently, the Scientific Council1 of the ERC has introduced changes in the evaluation processes and evaluation forms for the 2024 calls for research proposals2, as describ. d in the ERC ‘Work Programme 2024’ and the associated guidance documents3. This report ...
Writing a Research Proposal - Research Guides at University ...
The design elements and procedures for conducting research are governed by standards of the predominant discipline in which the problem resides, therefore, the guidelines for research proposals are more exacting and less formal than a general project proposal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews.
How Can Research Be Evaluated? | RAND - RAND Corporation
To be effective, the design of the framework should depend on the purpose of the evaluation: advocacy, accountability, analysis and/or allocation. Research evaluation tools typically fall into one of two groups, which serve different needs; multiple methods are required if researchers’ needs span both groups.
Research Evaluation - SpringerLink
In general, an applicant must provide arguments to show that he is fit for the proposed research. Evaluation of the proposed work is based on a number of criteria, often made explicit in a review template the evaluator is expected to fill. An example of a standard checklist for the evaluation of research proposals is reported in Box 5.4. Very ...
Writing a Research Proposal - LBST 2301 (SOCY): Critical ...
As with any research paper, your proposed study must inform the reader how and in what ways the study will examine the problem. Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research. This is critical. In many workplace settings, the research proposal is intended to argue for why a study should be funded.