One of the reasons for carrying out research is to add to the existing body of knowledge. Therefore, when conducting research, you need to document your processes and findings in a research report.
With a research report, it is easy to outline the findings of your systematic investigation and any gaps needing further inquiry. Knowing how to create a detailed research report will prove useful when you need to conduct research.
A research report is a well-crafted document that outlines the processes, data, and findings of a systematic investigation. It is an important document that serves as a first-hand account of the research process, and it is typically considered an objective and accurate source of information.
In many ways, a research report can be considered as a summary of the research process that clearly highlights findings, recommendations, and other important details. Reading a well-written research report should provide you with all the information you need about the core areas of the research process.
So how do you recognize a research report when you see one? Here are some of the basic features that define a research report.
The research report is classified based on two things; nature of research and target audience.
This is the type of report written for qualitative research . It outlines the methods, processes, and findings of a qualitative method of systematic investigation. In educational research, a qualitative research report provides an opportunity for one to apply his or her knowledge and develop skills in planning and executing qualitative research projects.
A qualitative research report is usually descriptive in nature. Hence, in addition to presenting details of the research process, you must also create a descriptive narrative of the information.
A quantitative research report is a type of research report that is written for quantitative research. Quantitative research is a type of systematic investigation that pays attention to numerical or statistical values in a bid to find answers to research questions.
In this type of research report, the researcher presents quantitative data to support the research process and findings. Unlike a qualitative research report that is mainly descriptive, a quantitative research report works with numbers; that is, it is numerical in nature.
Also, a research report can be said to be technical or popular based on the target audience. If you’re dealing with a general audience, you would need to present a popular research report, and if you’re dealing with a specialized audience, you would submit a technical report.
A technical research report is a detailed document that you present after carrying out industry-based research. This report is highly specialized because it provides information for a technical audience; that is, individuals with above-average knowledge in the field of study.
In a technical research report, the researcher is expected to provide specific information about the research process, including statistical analyses and sampling methods. Also, the use of language is highly specialized and filled with jargon.
Examples of technical research reports include legal and medical research reports.
A popular research report is one for a general audience; that is, for individuals who do not necessarily have any knowledge in the field of study. A popular research report aims to make information accessible to everyone.
It is written in very simple language, which makes it easy to understand the findings and recommendations. Examples of popular research reports are the information contained in newspapers and magazines.
A lot of detail goes into writing a research report, and getting familiar with the different requirements would help you create the ideal research report. A research report is usually broken down into multiple sections, which allows for a concise presentation of information.
This is the title of your systematic investigation. Your title should be concise and point to the aims, objectives, and findings of a research report.
This is like a compass that makes it easier for readers to navigate the research report.
An abstract is an overview that highlights all important aspects of the research including the research method, data collection process, and research findings. Think of an abstract as a summary of your research report that presents pertinent information in a concise manner.
An abstract is always brief; typically 100-150 words and goes straight to the point. The focus of your research abstract should be the 5Ws and 1H format – What, Where, Why, When, Who and How.
Here, the researcher highlights the aims and objectives of the systematic investigation as well as the problem which the systematic investigation sets out to solve. When writing the report introduction, it is also essential to indicate whether the purposes of the research were achieved or would require more work.
In the introduction section, the researcher specifies the research problem and also outlines the significance of the systematic investigation. Also, the researcher is expected to outline any jargons and terminologies that are contained in the research.
A literature review is a written survey of existing knowledge in the field of study. In other words, it is the section where you provide an overview and analysis of different research works that are relevant to your systematic investigation.
It highlights existing research knowledge and areas needing further investigation, which your research has sought to fill. At this stage, you can also hint at your research hypothesis and its possible implications for the existing body of knowledge in your field of study.
This is a detailed account of the research process, including the methodology, sample, and research subjects. Here, you are expected to provide in-depth information on the research process including the data collection and analysis procedures.
In a quantitative research report, you’d need to provide information surveys, questionnaires and other quantitative data collection methods used in your research. In a qualitative research report, you are expected to describe the qualitative data collection methods used in your research including interviews and focus groups.
In this section, you are expected to present the results of the systematic investigation.
This section further explains the findings of the research, earlier outlined. Here, you are expected to present a justification for each outcome and show whether the results are in line with your hypotheses or if other research studies have come up with similar results.
This is a summary of all the information in the report. It also outlines the significance of the entire study.
This section contains a list of all the primary and secondary research sources.
As is obtainable when writing an essay, defining the context for your research report would help you create a detailed yet concise document. This is why you need to create an outline before writing so that you do not miss out on anything.
Writing with your audience in mind is essential as it determines the tone of the report. If you’re writing for a general audience, you would want to present the information in a simple and relatable manner. For a specialized audience, you would need to make use of technical and field-specific terms.
The idea of a research report is to present some sort of abridged version of your systematic investigation. In your report, you should exclude irrelevant information while highlighting only important data and findings.
Your research report should include illustrations and other visual representations of your data. Graphs, pie charts, and relevant images lend additional credibility to your systematic investigation.
A good research report title is brief, precise, and contains keywords from your research. It should provide a clear idea of your systematic investigation so that readers can grasp the entire focus of your research from the title.
Before publishing the document, ensure that you give it a second look to authenticate the information. If you can, get someone else to go through the report, too, and you can also run it through proofreading and editing software.
Every research aims at solving a specific problem or set of problems, and this should be at the back of your mind when writing your research report. Understanding the problem would help you to filter the information you have and include only important data in your report.
This is somewhat similar to the point above because, in some way, the aim of your research report is intertwined with the objectives of your systematic investigation. Identifying the primary purpose of writing a research report would help you to identify and present the required information accordingly.
Knowing your target audience plays a crucial role in data collection for a research report. If your research report is specifically for an organization, you would want to present industry-specific information or show how the research findings are relevant to the work that the company does.
A survey is a research method that is used to gather data from a specific group of people through a set of questions. It can be either quantitative or qualitative.
A survey is usually made up of structured questions, and it can be administered online or offline. However, an online survey is a more effective method of research data collection because it helps you save time and gather data with ease.
You can seamlessly create an online questionnaire for your research on Formplus . With the multiple sharing options available in the builder, you would be able to administer your survey to respondents in little or no time.
Formplus also has a report summary too l that you can use to create custom visual reports for your research.
In the Formplus builder, you can easily create different online questionnaires for your research by dragging and dropping preferred fields into your form. To access the Formplus builder, you will need to create an account on Formplus.
Once you do this, sign in to your account and click on Create new form to begin.
Always remember that a research report is just as important as the actual systematic investigation because it plays a vital role in communicating research findings to everyone else. This is why you must take care to create a concise document summarizing the process of conducting any research.
In this article, we’ve outlined essential tips to help you create a research report. When writing your report, you should always have the audience at the back of your mind, as this would set the tone for the document.
Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!
You may also like:
Learn how to write problem statements before commencing any research effort. Learn about its structure and explore examples
In this article, you’ll learn about different assessment tools to help you evaluate performance in various contexts
Simple guide on ethnographic research, it types, methods, examples and advantages. Also highlights how to conduct an ethnographic...
In this article, we will discuss a number of chrome extensions you can use to make your research process even seamless
Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..
Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.
The purpose of research is to enhance society by advancing knowledge through the development of scientific theories, concepts and ideas. A research purpose is met through forming hypotheses, collecting data, analysing results, forming conclusions, implementing findings into real-life applications and forming new research questions.
Simply put, research is the process of discovering new knowledge. This knowledge can be either the development of new concepts or the advancement of existing knowledge and theories, leading to a new understanding that was not previously known.
As a more formal definition of research, the following has been extracted from the Code of Federal Regulations :
While research can be carried out by anyone and in any field, most research is usually done to broaden knowledge in the physical, biological, and social worlds. This can range from learning why certain materials behave the way they do, to asking why certain people are more resilient than others when faced with the same challenges.
The use of ‘systematic investigation’ in the formal definition represents how research is normally conducted – a hypothesis is formed, appropriate research methods are designed, data is collected and analysed, and research results are summarised into one or more ‘research conclusions’. These research conclusions are then shared with the rest of the scientific community to add to the existing knowledge and serve as evidence to form additional questions that can be investigated. It is this cyclical process that enables scientific research to make continuous progress over the years; the true purpose of research.
From weather forecasts to the discovery of antibiotics, researchers are constantly trying to find new ways to understand the world and how things work – with the ultimate goal of improving our lives.
The purpose of research is therefore to find out what is known, what is not and what we can develop further. In this way, scientists can develop new theories, ideas and products that shape our society and our everyday lives.
Although research can take many forms, there are three main purposes of research:
There are 8 core characteristics that all research projects should have. These are:
Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.
Research can be divided into two main types: basic research (also known as pure research) and applied research.
Basic research, also known as pure research, is an original investigation into the reasons behind a process, phenomenon or particular event. It focuses on generating knowledge around existing basic principles.
Basic research is generally considered ‘non-commercial research’ because it does not focus on solving practical problems, and has no immediate benefit or ways it can be applied.
While basic research may not have direct applications, it usually provides new insights that can later be used in applied research.
Applied research investigates well-known theories and principles in order to enhance knowledge around a practical aim. Because of this, applied research focuses on solving real-life problems by deriving knowledge which has an immediate application.
Research methods for data collection fall into one of two categories: inductive methods or deductive methods.
Inductive research methods focus on the analysis of an observation and are usually associated with qualitative research. Deductive research methods focus on the verification of an observation and are typically associated with quantitative research.
Qualitative research is a method that enables non-numerical data collection through open-ended methods such as interviews, case studies and focus groups .
It enables researchers to collect data on personal experiences, feelings or behaviours, as well as the reasons behind them. Because of this, qualitative research is often used in fields such as social science, psychology and philosophy and other areas where it is useful to know the connection between what has occurred and why it has occurred.
Quantitative research is a method that collects and analyses numerical data through statistical analysis.
It allows us to quantify variables, uncover relationships, and make generalisations across a larger population. As a result, quantitative research is often used in the natural and physical sciences such as engineering, biology, chemistry, physics, computer science, finance, and medical research, etc.
Research often follows a systematic approach known as a Scientific Method, which is carried out using an hourglass model.
A research project first starts with a problem statement, or rather, the research purpose for engaging in the study. This can take the form of the ‘ scope of the study ’ or ‘ aims and objectives ’ of your research topic.
Subsequently, a literature review is carried out and a hypothesis is formed. The researcher then creates a research methodology and collects the data.
The data is then analysed using various statistical methods and the null hypothesis is either accepted or rejected.
In both cases, the study and its conclusion are officially written up as a report or research paper, and the researcher may also recommend lines of further questioning. The report or research paper is then shared with the wider research community, and the cycle begins all over again.
Although these steps outline the overall research process, keep in mind that research projects are highly dynamic and are therefore considered an iterative process with continued refinements and not a series of fixed stages.
The purpose of research is to enhance society by advancing knowledge through developing scientific theories, concepts and ideas – find out more on what this involves.
Learning how to effectively collaborate with others is an important skill for anyone in academia to develop.
Being a new graduate teaching assistant can be a scary but rewarding undertaking – our 7 tips will help make your teaching journey as smooth as possible.
Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.
An abstract and introduction are the first two sections of your paper or thesis. This guide explains the differences between them and how to write them.
Find out how you can use Scrivener for PhD Thesis & Dissertation writing to streamline your workflow and make academic writing fun again!
Bethany is a 1st year PhD student at the University of Bath, researching the adaptation of a self-help smartphone app (BlueIce) to prevent self-harm and improve the mood of University students.
Emma is a third year PhD student at the University of Rhode Island. Her research focuses on the physiological and genomic response to climate change stressors.
Last updated
5 March 2024
Reviewed by
Short on time? Get an AI generated summary of this article instead
From successful product launches or software releases to planning major business decisions, research reports serve many vital functions. They can summarize evidence and deliver insights and recommendations to save companies time and resources. They can reveal the most value-adding actions a company should take.
However, poorly constructed reports can have the opposite effect! Taking the time to learn established research-reporting rules and approaches will equip you with in-demand skills. You’ll be able to capture and communicate information applicable to numerous situations and industries, adding another string to your resume bow.
A research report is a collection of contextual data, gathered through organized research, that provides new insights into a particular challenge (which, for this article, is business-related). Research reports are a time-tested method for distilling large amounts of data into a narrow band of focus.
Their effectiveness often hinges on whether the report provides:
Strong, well-researched evidence
Comprehensive analysis
Well-considered conclusions and recommendations
Though the topic possibilities are endless, an effective research report keeps a laser-like focus on the specific questions or objectives the researcher believes are key to achieving success. Many research reports begin as research proposals, which usually include the need for a report to capture the findings of the study and recommend a course of action.
A description of the research method used, e.g., qualitative, quantitative, or other
Statistical analysis
Causal (or explanatory) research (i.e., research identifying relationships between two variables)
Inductive research, also known as ‘theory-building’
Deductive research, such as that used to test theories
Action research, where the research is actively used to drive change
Research reports can unify and direct a company's focus toward the most appropriate strategic action. Of course, spending resources on a report takes up some of the company's human and financial resources. Choosing when a report is called for is a matter of judgment and experience.
Some development models used heavily in the engineering world, such as Waterfall development, are notorious for over-relying on research reports. With Waterfall development, there is a linear progression through each step of a project, and each stage is precisely documented and reported on before moving to the next.
The pace of the business world is faster than the speed at which your authors can produce and disseminate reports. So how do companies strike the right balance between creating and acting on research reports?
The answer lies, again, in the report's defined objectives. By paring down your most pressing interests and those of your stakeholders, your research and reporting skills will be the lenses that keep your company's priorities in constant focus.
Honing your company's primary objectives can save significant amounts of time and align research and reporting efforts with ever-greater precision.
Some examples of well-designed research objectives are:
Proving whether or not a product or service meets customer expectations
Demonstrating the value of a service, product, or business process to your stakeholders and investors
Improving business decision-making when faced with a lack of time or other constraints
Clarifying the relationship between a critical cause and effect for problematic business processes
Prioritizing the development of a backlog of products or product features
Comparing business or production strategies
Evaluating past decisions and predicting future outcomes
Research reports generally require a research design phase, where the report author(s) determine the most important elements the report must contain.
Just as there are various kinds of research, there are many types of reports.
Here are the standard elements of almost any research-reporting format:
Report summary. A broad but comprehensive overview of what readers will learn in the full report. Summaries are usually no more than one or two paragraphs and address all key elements of the report. Think of the key takeaways your primary stakeholders will want to know if they don’t have time to read the full document.
Introduction. Include a brief background of the topic, the type of research, and the research sample. Consider the primary goal of the report, who is most affected, and how far along the company is in meeting its objectives.
Methods. A description of how the researcher carried out data collection, analysis, and final interpretations of the data. Include the reasons for choosing a particular method. The methods section should strike a balance between clearly presenting the approach taken to gather data and discussing how it is designed to achieve the report's objectives.
Data analysis. This section contains interpretations that lead readers through the results relevant to the report's thesis. If there were unexpected results, include here a discussion on why that might be. Charts, calculations, statistics, and other supporting information also belong here (or, if lengthy, as an appendix). This should be the most detailed section of the research report, with references for further study. Present the information in a logical order, whether chronologically or in order of importance to the report's objectives.
Conclusion. This should be written with sound reasoning, often containing useful recommendations. The conclusion must be backed by a continuous thread of logic throughout the report.
With a clear outline and robust pool of research, a research paper can start to write itself, but what's a good way to start a research report?
Research report examples are often the quickest way to gain inspiration for your report. Look for the types of research reports most relevant to your industry and consider which makes the most sense for your data and goals.
The research report outline will help you organize the elements of your report. One of the most time-tested report outlines is the IMRaD structure:
Introduction
...and Discussion
Pay close attention to the most well-established research reporting format in your industry, and consider your tone and language from your audience's perspective. Learn the key terms inside and out; incorrect jargon could easily harm the perceived authority of your research paper.
Along with a foundation in high-quality research and razor-sharp analysis, the most effective research reports will also demonstrate well-developed:
Internal logic
Narrative flow
Conclusions and recommendations
Readability, striking a balance between simple phrasing and technical insight
The validity of research data is critical. Because the research phase usually occurs well before the writing phase, you normally have plenty of time to vet your data.
However, research reports could involve ongoing research, where report authors (sometimes the researchers themselves) write portions of the report alongside ongoing research.
One such research-report example would be an R&D department that knows its primary stakeholders are eager to learn about a lengthy work in progress and any potentially important outcomes.
However you choose to manage the research and reporting, your data must meet robust quality standards before you can rely on it. Vet any research with the following questions in mind:
Does it use statistically valid analysis methods?
Do the researchers clearly explain their research, analysis, and sampling methods?
Did the researchers provide any caveats or advice on how to interpret their data?
Have you gathered the data yourself or were you in close contact with those who did?
Is the source biased?
Usually, flawed research methods become more apparent the further you get through a research report.
It's perfectly natural for good research to raise new questions, but the reader should have no uncertainty about what the data represents. There should be no doubt about matters such as:
Whether the sampling or analysis methods were based on sound and consistent logic
What the research samples are and where they came from
The accuracy of any statistical functions or equations
Validation of testing and measuring processes
A robust design validation process is often a gold standard in highly technical research reports. Design validation ensures the objects of a study are measured accurately, which lends more weight to your report and makes it valuable to more specialized industries.
Product development and engineering projects are the most common research-report examples that typically involve a design validation process. Depending on the scope and complexity of your research, you might face additional steps to validate your data and research procedures.
If you’re including design validation in the report (or report proposal), explain and justify your data-collection processes. Good design validation builds greater trust in a research report and lends more weight to its conclusions.
Just as the quality of your report depends on properly validated research, a useful conclusion requires the most contextually relevant analysis method. This means comparing different statistical methods and choosing the one that makes the most sense for your research.
Most broadly, research analysis comes down to quantitative or qualitative methods (respectively: measurable by a number vs subjectively qualified values). There are also mixed research methods, which bridge the need for merging hard data with qualified assessments and still reach a cohesive set of conclusions.
Some of the most common analysis methods in research reports include:
Significance testing (aka hypothesis analysis), which compares test and control groups to determine how likely the data was the result of random chance.
Regression analysis , to establish relationships between variables, control for extraneous variables , and support correlation analysis.
Correlation analysis (aka bivariate testing), a method to identify and determine the strength of linear relationships between variables. It’s effective for detecting patterns from complex data, but care must be exercised to not confuse correlation with causation.
With any analysis method, it's important to justify which method you chose in the report. You should also provide estimates of the statistical accuracy (e.g., the p-value or confidence level of quantifiable data) of any data analysis.
This requires a commitment to the report's primary aim. For instance, this may be achieving a certain level of customer satisfaction by analyzing the cause and effect of changes to how service is delivered. Even better, use statistical analysis to calculate which change is most positively correlated with improved levels of customer satisfaction.
There's endless good advice for writing effective research reports, and it almost all depends on the subjective aims of the people behind the report. Due to the wide variety of research reports, the best tips will be unique to each author's purpose.
Consider the following research report tips in any order, and take note of the ones most relevant to you:
No matter how in depth or detailed your report might be, provide a well-considered, succinct summary. At the very least, give your readers a quick and effective way to get up to speed.
Pare down your target audience (e.g., other researchers, employees, laypersons, etc.), and adjust your voice for their background knowledge and interest levels
For all but the most open-ended research, clarify your objectives, both for yourself and within the report.
Leverage your team members’ talents to fill in any knowledge gaps you might have. Your team is only as good as the sum of its parts.
Justify why your research proposal’s topic will endure long enough to derive value from the finished report.
Consolidate all research and analysis functions onto a single user-friendly platform. There's no reason to settle for less than developer-grade tools suitable for non-developers.
The research-reporting format is how the report is structured—a framework the authors use to organize their data, conclusions, arguments, and recommendations. The format heavily determines how the report's outline develops, because the format dictates the overall structure and order of information (based on the report's goals and research objectives).
A good report outline gives form and substance to the report's objectives, presenting the results in a readable, engaging way. For any research-report format, the outline should create momentum along a chain of logic that builds up to a conclusion or interpretation.
There are several key differences between research reports and essays:
Research report:
Ordered into separate sections
More commercial in nature
Often includes infographics
Heavily descriptive
More self-referential
Usually provides recommendations
Research essay
Does not rely on research report formatting
More academically minded
Normally text-only
Less detailed
Omits discussion of methods
Usually non-prescriptive
Do you want to discover previous research faster?
Do you share your research findings with others?
Do you analyze research data?
Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster
Last updated: 18 April 2023
Last updated: 27 February 2023
Last updated: 22 August 2024
Last updated: 5 February 2023
Last updated: 16 August 2024
Last updated: 9 March 2023
Last updated: 30 April 2024
Last updated: 12 December 2023
Last updated: 11 March 2024
Last updated: 4 July 2024
Last updated: 6 March 2024
Last updated: 5 March 2024
Last updated: 13 May 2024
Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next, log in or sign up.
Get started for free
Home Market Research
Reports are usually spread across a vast horizon of topics but are focused on communicating information about a particular topic and a niche target market. The primary motive of research reports is to convey integral details about a study for marketers to consider while designing new strategies.
Certain events, facts, and other information based on incidents need to be relayed to the people in charge, and creating research reports is the most effective communication tool. Ideal research reports are extremely accurate in the offered information with a clear objective and conclusion. These reports should have a clean and structured format to relay information effectively.
Research reports are recorded data prepared by researchers or statisticians after analyzing the information gathered by conducting organized research, typically in the form of surveys or qualitative methods .
A research report is a reliable source to recount details about a conducted research. It is most often considered to be a true testimony of all the work done to garner specificities of research.
The various sections of a research report are:
Learn more: Quantitative Research
Research is imperative for launching a new product/service or a new feature. The markets today are extremely volatile and competitive due to new entrants every day who may or may not provide effective products. An organization needs to make the right decisions at the right time to be relevant in such a market with updated products that suffice customer demands.
The details of a research report may change with the purpose of research but the main components of a report will remain constant. The research approach of the market researcher also influences the style of writing reports. Here are seven main components of a productive research report:
Learn more: Quantitative Data
Learn more: Qualitative Observation
Writing research reports in the manner can lead to all the efforts going down the drain. Here are 15 tips for writing impactful research reports:
Learn more: Quantitative Observation
Learn more: Qualitative Data
Learn more: Market Research and Analysis
Sep 5, 2024
Sep 4, 2024
Sep 3, 2024
Sep 2, 2024
Home » Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide
Table of Contents
Definition:
Research Paper is a written document that presents the author’s original research, analysis, and interpretation of a specific topic or issue.
It is typically based on Empirical Evidence, and may involve qualitative or quantitative research methods, or a combination of both. The purpose of a research paper is to contribute new knowledge or insights to a particular field of study, and to demonstrate the author’s understanding of the existing literature and theories related to the topic.
The structure of a research paper typically follows a standard format, consisting of several sections that convey specific information about the research study. The following is a detailed explanation of the structure of a research paper:
The title page contains the title of the paper, the name(s) of the author(s), and the affiliation(s) of the author(s). It also includes the date of submission and possibly, the name of the journal or conference where the paper is to be published.
The abstract is a brief summary of the research paper, typically ranging from 100 to 250 words. It should include the research question, the methods used, the key findings, and the implications of the results. The abstract should be written in a concise and clear manner to allow readers to quickly grasp the essence of the research.
The introduction section of a research paper provides background information about the research problem, the research question, and the research objectives. It also outlines the significance of the research, the research gap that it aims to fill, and the approach taken to address the research question. Finally, the introduction section ends with a clear statement of the research hypothesis or research question.
The literature review section of a research paper provides an overview of the existing literature on the topic of study. It includes a critical analysis and synthesis of the literature, highlighting the key concepts, themes, and debates. The literature review should also demonstrate the research gap and how the current study seeks to address it.
The methods section of a research paper describes the research design, the sample selection, the data collection and analysis procedures, and the statistical methods used to analyze the data. This section should provide sufficient detail for other researchers to replicate the study.
The results section presents the findings of the research, using tables, graphs, and figures to illustrate the data. The findings should be presented in a clear and concise manner, with reference to the research question and hypothesis.
The discussion section of a research paper interprets the findings and discusses their implications for the research question, the literature review, and the field of study. It should also address the limitations of the study and suggest future research directions.
The conclusion section summarizes the main findings of the study, restates the research question and hypothesis, and provides a final reflection on the significance of the research.
The references section provides a list of all the sources cited in the paper, following a specific citation style such as APA, MLA or Chicago.
You can write Research Paper by the following guide:
Note : The below example research paper is for illustrative purposes only and is not an actual research paper. Actual research papers may have different structures, contents, and formats depending on the field of study, research question, data collection and analysis methods, and other factors. Students should always consult with their professors or supervisors for specific guidelines and expectations for their research papers.
Research Paper Example sample for Students:
Title: The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health among Young Adults
Abstract: This study aims to investigate the impact of social media use on the mental health of young adults. A literature review was conducted to examine the existing research on the topic. A survey was then administered to 200 university students to collect data on their social media use, mental health status, and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. The results showed that social media use is positively associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. The study also found that social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) are significant predictors of mental health problems among young adults.
Introduction: Social media has become an integral part of modern life, particularly among young adults. While social media has many benefits, including increased communication and social connectivity, it has also been associated with negative outcomes, such as addiction, cyberbullying, and mental health problems. This study aims to investigate the impact of social media use on the mental health of young adults.
Literature Review: The literature review highlights the existing research on the impact of social media use on mental health. The review shows that social media use is associated with depression, anxiety, stress, and other mental health problems. The review also identifies the factors that contribute to the negative impact of social media, including social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO.
Methods : A survey was administered to 200 university students to collect data on their social media use, mental health status, and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. The survey included questions on social media use, mental health status (measured using the DASS-21), and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression analysis.
Results : The results showed that social media use is positively associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. The study also found that social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO are significant predictors of mental health problems among young adults.
Discussion : The study’s findings suggest that social media use has a negative impact on the mental health of young adults. The study highlights the need for interventions that address the factors contributing to the negative impact of social media, such as social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO.
Conclusion : In conclusion, social media use has a significant impact on the mental health of young adults. The study’s findings underscore the need for interventions that promote healthy social media use and address the negative outcomes associated with social media use. Future research can explore the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing the negative impact of social media on mental health. Additionally, longitudinal studies can investigate the long-term effects of social media use on mental health.
Limitations : The study has some limitations, including the use of self-report measures and a cross-sectional design. The use of self-report measures may result in biased responses, and a cross-sectional design limits the ability to establish causality.
Implications: The study’s findings have implications for mental health professionals, educators, and policymakers. Mental health professionals can use the findings to develop interventions that address the negative impact of social media use on mental health. Educators can incorporate social media literacy into their curriculum to promote healthy social media use among young adults. Policymakers can use the findings to develop policies that protect young adults from the negative outcomes associated with social media use.
References :
Appendix : The survey used in this study is provided below.
Social Media and Mental Health Survey
Thank you for your participation!
Research papers have several applications in various fields, including:
Research papers are typically written when a person has completed a research project or when they have conducted a study and have obtained data or findings that they want to share with the academic or professional community. Research papers are usually written in academic settings, such as universities, but they can also be written in professional settings, such as research organizations, government agencies, or private companies.
Here are some common situations where a person might need to write a research paper:
The purpose of a research paper is to present the results of a study or investigation in a clear, concise, and structured manner. Research papers are written to communicate new knowledge, ideas, or findings to a specific audience, such as researchers, scholars, practitioners, or policymakers. The primary purposes of a research paper are:
Research papers have several characteristics that distinguish them from other forms of academic or professional writing. Here are some common characteristics of research papers:
Research papers have many advantages, both for the individual researcher and for the broader academic and professional community. Here are some advantages of research papers:
Research papers also have some limitations that should be considered when interpreting their findings or implications. Here are some common limitations of research papers:
Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer
Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.
Chapter 11: Presenting Your Research
Learning Objectives
In this section, we look at how to write an APA-style empirical research report , an article that presents the results of one or more new studies. Recall that the standard sections of an empirical research report provide a kind of outline. Here we consider each of these sections in detail, including what information it contains, how that information is formatted and organized, and tips for writing each section. At the end of this section is a sample APA-style research report that illustrates many of these principles.
Title page and abstract.
An APA-style research report begins with a title page . The title is centred in the upper half of the page, with each important word capitalized. The title should clearly and concisely (in about 12 words or fewer) communicate the primary variables and research questions. This sometimes requires a main title followed by a subtitle that elaborates on the main title, in which case the main title and subtitle are separated by a colon. Here are some titles from recent issues of professional journals published by the American Psychological Association.
Below the title are the authors’ names and, on the next line, their institutional affiliation—the university or other institution where the authors worked when they conducted the research. As we have already seen, the authors are listed in an order that reflects their contribution to the research. When multiple authors have made equal contributions to the research, they often list their names alphabetically or in a randomly determined order.
In some areas of psychology, the titles of many empirical research reports are informal in a way that is perhaps best described as “cute.” They usually take the form of a play on words or a well-known expression that relates to the topic under study. Here are some examples from recent issues of the Journal Psychological Science .
Individual researchers differ quite a bit in their preference for such titles. Some use them regularly, while others never use them. What might be some of the pros and cons of using cute article titles?
For articles that are being submitted for publication, the title page also includes an author note that lists the authors’ full institutional affiliations, any acknowledgments the authors wish to make to agencies that funded the research or to colleagues who commented on it, and contact information for the authors. For student papers that are not being submitted for publication—including theses—author notes are generally not necessary.
The abstract is a summary of the study. It is the second page of the manuscript and is headed with the word Abstract . The first line is not indented. The abstract presents the research question, a summary of the method, the basic results, and the most important conclusions. Because the abstract is usually limited to about 200 words, it can be a challenge to write a good one.
The introduction begins on the third page of the manuscript. The heading at the top of this page is the full title of the manuscript, with each important word capitalized as on the title page. The introduction includes three distinct subsections, although these are typically not identified by separate headings. The opening introduces the research question and explains why it is interesting, the literature review discusses relevant previous research, and the closing restates the research question and comments on the method used to answer it.
The opening , which is usually a paragraph or two in length, introduces the research question and explains why it is interesting. To capture the reader’s attention, researcher Daryl Bem recommends starting with general observations about the topic under study, expressed in ordinary language (not technical jargon)—observations that are about people and their behaviour (not about researchers or their research; Bem, 2003 [1] ). Concrete examples are often very useful here. According to Bem, this would be a poor way to begin a research report:
Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance received a great deal of attention during the latter part of the 20th century (p. 191)
The following would be much better:
The individual who holds two beliefs that are inconsistent with one another may feel uncomfortable. For example, the person who knows that he or she enjoys smoking but believes it to be unhealthy may experience discomfort arising from the inconsistency or disharmony between these two thoughts or cognitions. This feeling of discomfort was called cognitive dissonance by social psychologist Leon Festinger (1957), who suggested that individuals will be motivated to remove this dissonance in whatever way they can (p. 191).
After capturing the reader’s attention, the opening should go on to introduce the research question and explain why it is interesting. Will the answer fill a gap in the literature? Will it provide a test of an important theory? Does it have practical implications? Giving readers a clear sense of what the research is about and why they should care about it will motivate them to continue reading the literature review—and will help them make sense of it.
Breaking the Rules
Researcher Larry Jacoby reported several studies showing that a word that people see or hear repeatedly can seem more familiar even when they do not recall the repetitions—and that this tendency is especially pronounced among older adults. He opened his article with the following humourous anecdote:
A friend whose mother is suffering symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) tells the story of taking her mother to visit a nursing home, preliminary to her mother’s moving there. During an orientation meeting at the nursing home, the rules and regulations were explained, one of which regarded the dining room. The dining room was described as similar to a fine restaurant except that tipping was not required. The absence of tipping was a central theme in the orientation lecture, mentioned frequently to emphasize the quality of care along with the advantages of having paid in advance. At the end of the meeting, the friend’s mother was asked whether she had any questions. She replied that she only had one question: “Should I tip?” (Jacoby, 1999, p. 3)
Although both humour and personal anecdotes are generally discouraged in APA-style writing, this example is a highly effective way to start because it both engages the reader and provides an excellent real-world example of the topic under study.
Immediately after the opening comes the literature review , which describes relevant previous research on the topic and can be anywhere from several paragraphs to several pages in length. However, the literature review is not simply a list of past studies. Instead, it constitutes a kind of argument for why the research question is worth addressing. By the end of the literature review, readers should be convinced that the research question makes sense and that the present study is a logical next step in the ongoing research process.
Like any effective argument, the literature review must have some kind of structure. For example, it might begin by describing a phenomenon in a general way along with several studies that demonstrate it, then describing two or more competing theories of the phenomenon, and finally presenting a hypothesis to test one or more of the theories. Or it might describe one phenomenon, then describe another phenomenon that seems inconsistent with the first one, then propose a theory that resolves the inconsistency, and finally present a hypothesis to test that theory. In applied research, it might describe a phenomenon or theory, then describe how that phenomenon or theory applies to some important real-world situation, and finally suggest a way to test whether it does, in fact, apply to that situation.
Looking at the literature review in this way emphasizes a few things. First, it is extremely important to start with an outline of the main points that you want to make, organized in the order that you want to make them. The basic structure of your argument, then, should be apparent from the outline itself. Second, it is important to emphasize the structure of your argument in your writing. One way to do this is to begin the literature review by summarizing your argument even before you begin to make it. “In this article, I will describe two apparently contradictory phenomena, present a new theory that has the potential to resolve the apparent contradiction, and finally present a novel hypothesis to test the theory.” Another way is to open each paragraph with a sentence that summarizes the main point of the paragraph and links it to the preceding points. These opening sentences provide the “transitions” that many beginning researchers have difficulty with. Instead of beginning a paragraph by launching into a description of a previous study, such as “Williams (2004) found that…,” it is better to start by indicating something about why you are describing this particular study. Here are some simple examples:
Another example of this phenomenon comes from the work of Williams (2004).
Williams (2004) offers one explanation of this phenomenon.
An alternative perspective has been provided by Williams (2004).
We used a method based on the one used by Williams (2004).
Finally, remember that your goal is to construct an argument for why your research question is interesting and worth addressing—not necessarily why your favourite answer to it is correct. In other words, your literature review must be balanced. If you want to emphasize the generality of a phenomenon, then of course you should discuss various studies that have demonstrated it. However, if there are other studies that have failed to demonstrate it, you should discuss them too. Or if you are proposing a new theory, then of course you should discuss findings that are consistent with that theory. However, if there are other findings that are inconsistent with it, again, you should discuss them too. It is acceptable to argue that the balance of the research supports the existence of a phenomenon or is consistent with a theory (and that is usually the best that researchers in psychology can hope for), but it is not acceptable to ignore contradictory evidence. Besides, a large part of what makes a research question interesting is uncertainty about its answer.
The closing of the introduction—typically the final paragraph or two—usually includes two important elements. The first is a clear statement of the main research question or hypothesis. This statement tends to be more formal and precise than in the opening and is often expressed in terms of operational definitions of the key variables. The second is a brief overview of the method and some comment on its appropriateness. Here, for example, is how Darley and Latané (1968) [2] concluded the introduction to their classic article on the bystander effect:
These considerations lead to the hypothesis that the more bystanders to an emergency, the less likely, or the more slowly, any one bystander will intervene to provide aid. To test this proposition it would be necessary to create a situation in which a realistic “emergency” could plausibly occur. Each subject should also be blocked from communicating with others to prevent his getting information about their behaviour during the emergency. Finally, the experimental situation should allow for the assessment of the speed and frequency of the subjects’ reaction to the emergency. The experiment reported below attempted to fulfill these conditions. (p. 378)
Thus the introduction leads smoothly into the next major section of the article—the method section.
The method section is where you describe how you conducted your study. An important principle for writing a method section is that it should be clear and detailed enough that other researchers could replicate the study by following your “recipe.” This means that it must describe all the important elements of the study—basic demographic characteristics of the participants, how they were recruited, whether they were randomly assigned, how the variables were manipulated or measured, how counterbalancing was accomplished, and so on. At the same time, it should avoid irrelevant details such as the fact that the study was conducted in Classroom 37B of the Industrial Technology Building or that the questionnaire was double-sided and completed using pencils.
The method section begins immediately after the introduction ends with the heading “Method” (not “Methods”) centred on the page. Immediately after this is the subheading “Participants,” left justified and in italics. The participants subsection indicates how many participants there were, the number of women and men, some indication of their age, other demographics that may be relevant to the study, and how they were recruited, including any incentives given for participation.
After the participants section, the structure can vary a bit. Figure 11.1 shows three common approaches. In the first, the participants section is followed by a design and procedure subsection, which describes the rest of the method. This works well for methods that are relatively simple and can be described adequately in a few paragraphs. In the second approach, the participants section is followed by separate design and procedure subsections. This works well when both the design and the procedure are relatively complicated and each requires multiple paragraphs.
What is the difference between design and procedure? The design of a study is its overall structure. What were the independent and dependent variables? Was the independent variable manipulated, and if so, was it manipulated between or within subjects? How were the variables operationally defined? The procedure is how the study was carried out. It often works well to describe the procedure in terms of what the participants did rather than what the researchers did. For example, the participants gave their informed consent, read a set of instructions, completed a block of four practice trials, completed a block of 20 test trials, completed two questionnaires, and were debriefed and excused.
In the third basic way to organize a method section, the participants subsection is followed by a materials subsection before the design and procedure subsections. This works well when there are complicated materials to describe. This might mean multiple questionnaires, written vignettes that participants read and respond to, perceptual stimuli, and so on. The heading of this subsection can be modified to reflect its content. Instead of “Materials,” it can be “Questionnaires,” “Stimuli,” and so on.
The results section is where you present the main results of the study, including the results of the statistical analyses. Although it does not include the raw data—individual participants’ responses or scores—researchers should save their raw data and make them available to other researchers who request them. Several journals now encourage the open sharing of raw data online.
Although there are no standard subsections, it is still important for the results section to be logically organized. Typically it begins with certain preliminary issues. One is whether any participants or responses were excluded from the analyses and why. The rationale for excluding data should be described clearly so that other researchers can decide whether it is appropriate. A second preliminary issue is how multiple responses were combined to produce the primary variables in the analyses. For example, if participants rated the attractiveness of 20 stimulus people, you might have to explain that you began by computing the mean attractiveness rating for each participant. Or if they recalled as many items as they could from study list of 20 words, did you count the number correctly recalled, compute the percentage correctly recalled, or perhaps compute the number correct minus the number incorrect? A third preliminary issue is the reliability of the measures. This is where you would present test-retest correlations, Cronbach’s α, or other statistics to show that the measures are consistent across time and across items. A final preliminary issue is whether the manipulation was successful. This is where you would report the results of any manipulation checks.
The results section should then tackle the primary research questions, one at a time. Again, there should be a clear organization. One approach would be to answer the most general questions and then proceed to answer more specific ones. Another would be to answer the main question first and then to answer secondary ones. Regardless, Bem (2003) [3] suggests the following basic structure for discussing each new result:
Notice that only Step 3 necessarily involves numbers. The rest of the steps involve presenting the research question and the answer to it in words. In fact, the basic results should be clear even to a reader who skips over the numbers.
The discussion is the last major section of the research report. Discussions usually consist of some combination of the following elements:
The discussion typically begins with a summary of the study that provides a clear answer to the research question. In a short report with a single study, this might require no more than a sentence. In a longer report with multiple studies, it might require a paragraph or even two. The summary is often followed by a discussion of the theoretical implications of the research. Do the results provide support for any existing theories? If not, how can they be explained? Although you do not have to provide a definitive explanation or detailed theory for your results, you at least need to outline one or more possible explanations. In applied research—and often in basic research—there is also some discussion of the practical implications of the research. How can the results be used, and by whom, to accomplish some real-world goal?
The theoretical and practical implications are often followed by a discussion of the study’s limitations. Perhaps there are problems with its internal or external validity. Perhaps the manipulation was not very effective or the measures not very reliable. Perhaps there is some evidence that participants did not fully understand their task or that they were suspicious of the intent of the researchers. Now is the time to discuss these issues and how they might have affected the results. But do not overdo it. All studies have limitations, and most readers will understand that a different sample or different measures might have produced different results. Unless there is good reason to think they would have, however, there is no reason to mention these routine issues. Instead, pick two or three limitations that seem like they could have influenced the results, explain how they could have influenced the results, and suggest ways to deal with them.
Most discussions end with some suggestions for future research. If the study did not satisfactorily answer the original research question, what will it take to do so? What new research questions has the study raised? This part of the discussion, however, is not just a list of new questions. It is a discussion of two or three of the most important unresolved issues. This means identifying and clarifying each question, suggesting some alternative answers, and even suggesting ways they could be studied.
Finally, some researchers are quite good at ending their articles with a sweeping or thought-provoking conclusion. Darley and Latané (1968) [4] , for example, ended their article on the bystander effect by discussing the idea that whether people help others may depend more on the situation than on their personalities. Their final sentence is, “If people understand the situational forces that can make them hesitate to intervene, they may better overcome them” (p. 383). However, this kind of ending can be difficult to pull off. It can sound overreaching or just banal and end up detracting from the overall impact of the article. It is often better simply to end when you have made your final point (although you should avoid ending on a limitation).
The references section begins on a new page with the heading “References” centred at the top of the page. All references cited in the text are then listed in the format presented earlier. They are listed alphabetically by the last name of the first author. If two sources have the same first author, they are listed alphabetically by the last name of the second author. If all the authors are the same, then they are listed chronologically by the year of publication. Everything in the reference list is double-spaced both within and between references.
Appendices, tables, and figures come after the references. An appendix is appropriate for supplemental material that would interrupt the flow of the research report if it were presented within any of the major sections. An appendix could be used to present lists of stimulus words, questionnaire items, detailed descriptions of special equipment or unusual statistical analyses, or references to the studies that are included in a meta-analysis. Each appendix begins on a new page. If there is only one, the heading is “Appendix,” centred at the top of the page. If there is more than one, the headings are “Appendix A,” “Appendix B,” and so on, and they appear in the order they were first mentioned in the text of the report.
After any appendices come tables and then figures. Tables and figures are both used to present results. Figures can also be used to illustrate theories (e.g., in the form of a flowchart), display stimuli, outline procedures, and present many other kinds of information. Each table and figure appears on its own page. Tables are numbered in the order that they are first mentioned in the text (“Table 1,” “Table 2,” and so on). Figures are numbered the same way (“Figure 1,” “Figure 2,” and so on). A brief explanatory title, with the important words capitalized, appears above each table. Each figure is given a brief explanatory caption, where (aside from proper nouns or names) only the first word of each sentence is capitalized. More details on preparing APA-style tables and figures are presented later in the book.
Figures 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, and 11.5 show some sample pages from an APA-style empirical research report originally written by undergraduate student Tomoe Suyama at California State University, Fresno. The main purpose of these figures is to illustrate the basic organization and formatting of an APA-style empirical research report, although many high-level and low-level style conventions can be seen here too.
Key Takeaways
Figure 11.1 long description: Table showing three ways of organizing an APA-style method section.
In the simple method, there are two subheadings: “Participants” (which might begin “The participants were…”) and “Design and procedure” (which might begin “There were three conditions…”).
In the typical method, there are three subheadings: “Participants” (“The participants were…”), “Design” (“There were three conditions…”), and “Procedure” (“Participants viewed each stimulus on the computer screen…”).
In the complex method, there are four subheadings: “Participants” (“The participants were…”), “Materials” (“The stimuli were…”), “Design” (“There were three conditions…”), and “Procedure” (“Participants viewed each stimulus on the computer screen…”). [Return to Figure 11.1]
A type of research article which describes one or more new empirical studies conducted by the authors.
The page at the beginning of an APA-style research report containing the title of the article, the authors’ names, and their institutional affiliation.
A summary of a research study.
The third page of a manuscript containing the research question, the literature review, and comments about how to answer the research question.
An introduction to the research question and explanation for why this question is interesting.
A description of relevant previous research on the topic being discusses and an argument for why the research is worth addressing.
The end of the introduction, where the research question is reiterated and the method is commented upon.
The section of a research report where the method used to conduct the study is described.
The main results of the study, including the results from statistical analyses, are presented in a research article.
Section of a research report that summarizes the study's results and interprets them by referring back to the study's theoretical background.
Part of a research report which contains supplemental material.
Research Methods in Psychology - 2nd Canadian Edition Copyright © 2015 by Paul C. Price, Rajiv Jhangiani, & I-Chant A. Chiang is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
A research report is a document in which a researcher presents the results of an original study. In the past, research reports were published as PDFs. But as you will see from the examples in this guide, the best research reports today are published as highly visual, interactive web pages.
Indeed — over the last five years, we’ve seen an explosion of research reports and white papers from businesses and NGOs.
Take, for example, this recent report on Green Mortgages from IMLA, made with the assistance of digital agency Rostrum. It’s a beautifully designed report, rich with infographics and data visualisations .
The biggest SaaS companies are also investing in reports, including Slack , Twilio , and Atlassian .
It's not only businesses publishing reports. The white paper below, from the Publishers Association, dives into an initiative on the future role of artificial intelligence in the publishing industry.
Join the BBC, Penguin, and the University of Cambridge. Craft stunning, interactive web content with Shorthand. Publish your first story — no code or web design skills required. Sign up now.
A research report is an in-depth document that contains the results of a research project. It includes information about the research topic, the research question, the methodology used to collect data from respondents, the results of the research, and the conclusion of the researcher.
The report also includes information about the funding source or partnerships for the project, if applicable. The purpose of a research report is to communicate the findings of research studies to a wider audience. The report should be clear, concise, and well-organised so that readers can easily understand the information presented.
Many research reports are formally structured, with headings and — for PDFs — page numbers,
As mentioned above, research reports have traditionally been published as PDFs , but are increasingly moving to interactive content .
Why are these organisations investing in research reports and white papers?
Most of these teams aren’t filled with scientists or academics, and their readers aren’t usually trawling research databases for help with their work.
The reason is — let’s be blunt — most content published on the web underwhelms.
Even on the most well-attended blogs, organic traffic and dwell-time generally remains flat. CTAs are stubbornly un-clicked. The common fate of most content is to gather dust almost immediately after publication.
There are many reasons for this. Search has clearly become much more competitive. It’s difficult for most organisations to get their ordinary blog content ranked anywhere near the first page.
Social media, too, has long been a ‘pay-to-play’ environment, with only extremely brave (or foolish) content teams banking on their posts going viral.
To meet these challenges, the most successful content teams have committed to producing high-quality content. Rather than pumping out content-for-content’s-sake — which, to be frank, few humans actually want to read — these teams produce content that helps, informs, and delights their readers.
High quality content takes a range of forms, including ebooks, longform content , all-encompassing ‘skyscraper’ guides, and feature stories . It's often highly visual, immersive, and multimedia, and can include elements like audio, video, and interactive infographics .
Because this content is produced to genuinely help the reader, it’s much more likely to be read, shared, and — critically for SEO — linked. Readers tend to stay on the page for longer, another key metric for SEO. They’re also more likely to click calls-to-action.
This is borne out by our customers at Shorthand. After nine months using Shorthand as an investment in producing high quality content, Imperial College London’s feature stories saw 142% higher average unique pageviews and 50% higher average time on page.
Honda, too, saw the average site dwell time increase by 85% after transitioning to publishing immersive, high quality digital stories (again, built with Shorthand).
Clearly, quality content gets better results. But it isn’t easy to make. It requires investment, dedication, and clear goals.
In this guide, we focus on one of the best-performing genres of quality content — the research report, which has become the not-so-secret weapon for the world’s leading content teams.
For most organisations, research reports will sit somewhere between marketing and academia.
On the one hand, they need to be as rigorous, scientific, and statistically literate as any published research paper. There's no point — and real reputational risk — in publishing a sloppy, factually inaccurate report.
On the other hand, most research reports outside of academia are published to support sales and marketing efforts. For some companies, such as market research firms, these reports are the product itself. Research reports need to be beautifully produced, clearly written, and have clear takeaways for the reader.
But unlike academia, there's also no one-size-fits-all structure. With that in mind, here are some common sections to keep in mind when writing a research report.
Navigation For print reports and PDFs, it's common to include a table of contents after the title page. But if you're producing your report natively for the web — which we highly recommend — then it's worth giving your reader a way to jump back and forth. At Shorthand, we make it simple to create a custom top navigation, which allows readers to easily browse through longer content.
Introduction section For research reports, your introduction is a good opportunity to outline the scope of your work; note your research questions, research design, and research methods; establish context and significance; and add any background information you think might be relevant.
Literature review These take a specific form in academic research, but outside of academia, it might pay to show some awareness of other research that has been conducted in your space.
Research methodology Again, this doesn't need to have all the rigour of an academic journal article. But to establish credibility, it pays to outline how you produced and analysed the qualitative or quantitative data at the heart of your report. For example, if you collected your data from an online questionnaire, it pays to point this out.
Research findings The most important part of your report will be your results section, covering of your findings. As we discuss below, for quantitative research, this section should be rich with data visualisations and infographics . This will likely be the most compelling part of the report for your readers.
Discussion section This is where you can contextualise the results, and offer an argument about the significance of the data. In many research reports for brands, this section and the 'research findings' sections are merged.
Conclusion This is where you can pull the various threads of your research report together. This will also allow you to carefully advance an argument about the significance of the research, and what it suggests about the future.
Craft stunning, interactive research reports with Shorthand. Publish your first story — no code or web design skills required. Sign up now.
More than any other genre of content, research reports require consistent — and persistent — project management. Unlike blog posts or case studies, a research report can't be turned around in a week or two.
This can be daunting for teams that haven't published research before — and daunting projects have a way of getting postponed.
As with any large project, the best thing to do is create a realistic plan. This plan will need to include all the different stakeholders — including writers, designers, and management — and factor in their likely contribution. Part of this will involve taking a realistic look at their future commitments.
Plan time for data collection, drafting, data visualisation, design, editing , and writing. This will all take longer than you think.
Once you've established your plan — and once it's been signed off by all relevant stakeholders — stick to it. Trust it. Try not to deviate too much from the process.
Data is the core of any research report. It will be the stuff that gets quoted and highlighted, and it will be what earns your report any backlinks or extra addition.
Without fresh data, your report is just another bunch of unsupported assertions — and there’s more than enough of those on the web already.
The way you get fresh data will depend on what exactly you’re researching. You might be analysing usage patterns in software. You might be interviewing your customers or a professional cohort.
It could be anything — but whatever it is, make sure it’s fresh and unique to your report.
If you're looking for more examples and inspiration, check out our guide on how to get started with data storytelling , as well as our post on 8 examples of powerful data stories .
(or anything else).
Odds are, your research report isn’t going to be peer reviewed, and it won’t be published in a scientific journal. But this doesn't give you an excuse to cut corners.
A research report is a form of ‘anchor’ content. It is specifically produced to earn attention for your brand.
But attention can swing both ways. If people notice mistakes or major errors in your report, then this will impact the reputation of your organisation.
What are the most common mistakes for research reports?
The most common areas where research reports fall down are in data collection, data analysis, and data visualisation. Make sure you have someone sufficiently numerate to double-check your process and results.
A research report is an invaluable way to establish your brand as a leader in your field. This is important for SEO and engagement. But it’s also important for the buying process — whatever it is your organisation is trying to sell.
Simply put, potential leads are much more likely to take action with organisations that they trust. This is true for businesses — but it is also true for NGOs, universities, and government agencies.
You can read more in our guide to brand storytelling .
The most effective research reports are presented as a neutral interpretation of data — without any embellishment or sales flourishes.
Ideally, you want your readers to engage with your report as an accurate representation of the world. You want them to trust it — and trust you. Anything that betrays your agenda will weaken this trust, and make the report less effective.
Obviously, your report isn’t neutral. It’s an investment in a piece of content. And, like all content you publish, you have an end goal in mind.
But, done well, a professionally produced report will accomplish those goals — including better engagement, reputational gain, and lead generation — without you needing to aggressively sell your product or service.
After collecting data and analysing your findings, you need to consider your data visualisations. This includes any relevant charts, graphs, and maps.
Your data visualisations will be the centrepiece of your report. They will likely be the parts of your report that readers skip to. They’re also likely to be the information readers retain and share.
With this in mind, they're worth doing right. There are many different data visualisation tools out there, and there's no single best approach.
Read more about data visualisation in our guide to effective data journalism .
Some reports will benefit from a chart or map that readers can click and interrogate in the browser. Others will benefit from scroll-based animation, as used in this story from the Council of the European Union.
One constant across the best research reports on the web, though, is the use of interactive data visualisation. While it was common in the past to use static images of charts and graphs — usually recycling visual assets used in the PDF version of the report — this approach is gradually being supplanted by more advanced techniques.
Some of these data visualisation techniques will require web design and developer resource. Others — like Shorthand itself — will be easier to use out-of-the-box.
PDFs are an extraordinarily common method of publishing research reports — even today. Indeed, some organisations publish their reports as ‘PDF-first,’ with any web publication treated as a poor cousin.
This is the wrong approach. And with the rise of new web technologies and more powerful web browsers, it’s also extremely outdated. For better results, we recommend producing reports first and foremost for the web.
Web-based reports have many distinct advantages over the PDF, including:
If you want you to read more about the problems with the PDF, check out our guide on why the PDF is falling out of favour .
With the rise of digital storytelling platforms, the calibre of published research reports on the web has improved markedly. That means that there are plenty of excellent reports to check out for inspiration.
At Shorthand, we’ve collected some of the best reports — including thought-leadership reports, annual reports for businesses and NGOs, and original research — in our collection of featured stories .
Receive storytelling tips from The Craft and the most amazing Shorthand stories from around the web, hand selected by our team, every two weeks.
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.
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:
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.
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.
Research objectives are important because they:
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.
Your research aim should reflect your research problem and should be relatively broad.
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?
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:
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
Statistics
Research 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:
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/
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”
Research report: 5 things to know about research report.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
This article throws light upon the five things to know about research report.
The purpose of research report is to convey the interested persons the whole result of study in sufficient detail and to determine himself the validity of the conclusions. As the culmination of the research investigation, the research report contains a description of different stages of the survey and the conclusions arrived at. Thus it is an end product of a research activity which gives an account of a long journey on the path of finding a new knowledge or modified knowledge.
Writing a research report is a technical task as it requires not only skill on the part of the researcher but also considerable effort, patience and penetration, an overall approach to the problem, data and analysis along with grasp over language and greater objectivity, all springing from considerable thought.
Writing a research report also involves adequate planning and a vast amount of preparation. That apart, perfection of research report is also attributed to coherence of thought, creativity and intelligence of the researcher.
Although a definite standard criterion for the organisation is not possible, a good report writer should always be conscious about the effective and purposeful communication with the society by conveying the interested persons the entire outcome of the study so as to ensure each reader to comprehend the data and to enable himself to cognize the validity of the conclusions. Consideration of certain questions like who says ‘what is it about’, ‘to whom’, ‘in what manner’ and ‘of what use’ will enable the researcher in preparing a standard research report.
No uniform research report can be prepared to cater to the needs of different categories of audiences. The report should always incorporate the material which will be of interest to the target audience, may that be investigator of fundamental research or applied research, practitioners, policy formulators, funding agents or sponsors or even the general public. To a report writer, the prima facie task may appear an easy affair. But in real terms this is a herculean task as uncertainty about target group results in ineffective communication.
A good research report not only disseminates knowledge, but also presents the findings for expansion of the horizon of knowledge. That apart, it also checks the validity of the generalization and inspires others to carry on related or allied problems.
The purpose of the research report may be discussed under the following heads:
1. Transmission of Knowledge:
The knowledge that has been obtained on the basis of research need transmission for proper utilization of the resources invested. Because of that reason, it is always advisable to prepare to report in a written manner so that it can also provide knowledge to layman in understanding various social problems.
2. Presentation of Findings:
Society is more concerned with the finished product in terms of output of research which has the input of immense money, human resources and precious time. Therefore, the social utility of the research report lies in its exposure to the laymen as well as its submission to the sponsoring agency of the project.
Whereas people may acquire knowledge about various social problems in the widest possible manner, the sponsoring agency may take the credit of the conduct of a piece of successful research. Even interesting findings may draw the attention of the world community through mass media. That apart, it may also result in legislative or ameliorative, measures.
3. Examining the Validity of the Generalizations:
Submission of the report enables the researchers to examine the validity and the authenticity of the generalizations. For that purpose the report must be prepared and presented in an organized form. Thereafter it can be checked and the discrepancy, if any, in generalizations, practical or real can be dispelled and the facts can be re-examined and reorganized.
4. Inspiration for Further Research:
Research report inspires others to undertake further research in the same line or in any other inter-disciplinary fields. If the report appears to be interesting and a novel one, it is more likely to draw the attention of the social scientists.
At the outset, before the commencement of report writing, the researcher needs accurate planning and organisation of study materials to be used prudently. Simple accumulation of masses of data would not make proper sense, only when such data are arranged in a logical and coherent manner within the framework of overall structure those are construed to be planned and organized.
When proper planning and organisation are made the following positive outcomes are obtained:
(i) Ideas and data are screened, i.e. only those ideas and data having relevance to the study are incorporated and the rest are left out;
(ii) The report is marked by greater synthesis of facts with clear-cut explanation;
(iii) The output of research becomes easily intelligible to the readers;
(iv) Transition in passing of ideas are smoothened;
(v) Presents facts sequentially and maintains their unity; and
(vi) Provides the readers with a comprehensive report in a well integrated manner.
Since the research report aims at conveying the interested persons the whole result of the study in sufficient detail, the report must incorporate all such materials. Formation of a satisfactory outline is a must as it serves as the skeleton in the human body. In order to give place to all important aspects in the report, the writing should be an elaborate one which is possible only if a three stage preparation is made, such as;
(i) The topical outline,
(ii) Paragraph outline and
(iii) Sentence outline.
The first outline, known as the topical outline, resembles a skeleton outline as it incorporates their major aspects. Paragraph outline not only includes all major paragraphs but also indicates their central ideas. Sentence outline is composed of various points to be incorporated in the sentence, not writing of sentences as it is construed from its very name.
While planning on outline the following suggestions, advanced by M.H. Gopal, may be observed:
1. As far as practicable the report writer should detail the findings and maintain continuity;
2. It should be clear and exclude such value phrases as ‘introduction’, ‘body, ‘conclusion’ etc. which have no role in the report writing;
3. Chronology, topical unity, coherence and transition must be given due consideration; and
4. Each major idea should be contained in a paragraph.
The outline of a standard research report constitutes three main parts, such as:
(i) The preliminaries;
(ii) Contents, and
(iii) The reference material.
(i) Title page.
(ii) Foreword or preface, acknowledgements.
(ii) List of tables, charts or illustrations.
(iv) Table of contents.
(i) Introduction:
The introductory part of research report should not only contain purpose of the study, statement of the problem, hypothesis and operational definition of the concepts, but should also contain a description of the agency, personnel and other aspects of research.
This part of report should contain the following:
(a) Purpose of investigation, statement of the problem, hypothesis and operational definition of the concepts.
(b) Sponsoring agency, personnel etc.
(c) Survey of literature and related studies
(d) Time, Field of Study and materials.
(e) Scope of study and limitations, if any.
(ii) The Research procedure:
This part of research report contains the following:
(a) The study, design
(b) The universe and the organisation of sampling procedures
(c) Methods, tools and techniques employed for collection of data.
(iii). Analysis and Presentation of findings:
This part of research happens to be the significant aspect as it contains not only the analysis of data collected but also the inferences drawn from the data on the basis of logic or statistics. Therefore, proofs whether logical or numerical must be shown in support of the generalization or theory that has been drawn on the basis of investigation.
Analysis and presentation of findings may be split into the following heads:
(a) Nature, volume and dimension of facts.
(b) Statistical analysis of data and their presentation,
(c) Interpretation, generalization and conclusions,
(d) Summary of findings and suggestions.
1. Bibliography:
It is a list of books and articles in the following order:
(i) Name of the author—An alphabetic order of the second names and in case of co-authors, except for the first author’s second name, the other authors’ first name occur first and then the second names etc.
(ii) Title of the book in italics, followed by the edition number, if any. In case of article, its name is to be quoted in italics, followed by the name of the journal/magazine; volume number in—Roman numerals and number of the journal.
(iii) Place of publication and name of the publishers.
(iv) Year of publication.
2. Appendices:
Appendices such as questionnaires, interview- schedules, statistical tables etc. not only add to the value and reliability of the research report, but, also present the basis on which the report has been prepared and generalizations have been made.
3. Glossary of terms
It gives an alphabetically arranged detailed reference to all important matters contained in the research reports. There may be either subject index or author index.
While preparing the research report the investigator must strictly adhere to a set of standards comprising simplicity, objectivity, application of quantitative terms, error-free description, citations of footnotes, use of abbreviations in bibliography or footnotes, layout of headings size and pagination.
The report must be creative, must have sufficient clarity in terms of both thought and language. The sentence should be expressed in a simple concise manner and as far as possible slang; flippant phrases and entangled clauses and sub-clauses should be avoided. In order to highlight the important points in an adequate manner, long paragraphs should always be avoided and as far as practicable each paragraph may be sub-divided into small paragraphs. While using the technical terms, the target group must not be lost sight of Sufficient care must be taken to ensure that the reader must grasp the report easily.
The report must be made free from any influence by any element of extortion or persuasion. It should not contain any prejudice or pre-conceived notion of the investigator and the explanations must not aim at simply convincing the readers. The researcher should not use any personal terms like T, ‘we’, ‘you’, ‘my’, ‘our’ and us. Rather he should introduce himself as the ‘investigator’ or the ‘researcher’ in the report.
The last names of the authors should find place in the report. The report must be presented as a scientific document. But at the same time care must be taken to keep in view the capacity of understanding of the readers. Although scientific terminology is used, each term should be clarified. Description of the procedures of research should be in the past tense.
It is desirable that the researcher should use quantitative terms like ‘less in quantity” or ‘far in number.’ He must spell out the numbers appearing at the beginning of sentences as well as the fractions, unless they are combined. Moreover percent also need spell out if it is not in the tables or figures (i.e. 10 per cent rather 10%). If the numbers involve more than three digits, commas should be used to point off thousand of millions (i.e. 3,479; 39,814,111).
The researcher should always try to avoid spelling mistakes, inconsistencies as well as grammatical errors. The use of a good dictionary will be of great help in this regard. Standard rules must be followed to prevent any error relating to punctuations. There should be a free flow of language in the report, otherwise it will be irritating.
Before the manuscript is sent for final typing, it must be rectified by a competent proof reader and thereafter it may be given for typesetting. Carelessness must always be avoided at every stage beginning from report writing and ending with type setting. An effective research report is necessarily obliged to undergo the process of several revisions before it is published.
Proper chapterisation is an essential feature of research report. A standard report always contains chapters, sections, sub-sections, tables and adequate charts. The term chapter should be typed in capital letter and the chapter number should be capitalized Roman numeral. The term as well as the numbers should be placed four spaces lower than the usual top line of the text and at the middle of the breadth of the text.
The caption should be typed in Capital letters and find its place at the centre, usually two spaces below the title of the chapter. The sections of the chapter should have a central head and the textual materials should begin after three spaces below the sectional head. The sub-sections and any further sub-division should appear with a free standing head towards the left margin and with a paragraph side head respectively.
In order to make the report more impressive and authentic, the report writer may make use of the footnotes frequently. Footnotes may be used to explain in the form of statements with the continuity of the material contained in the text. The footnote citations are given at the bottom of the page. When used serially, the footnotes are labelled.
Usually the footnotes are positioned at the bottom d are separated by a two-inch horizontal line drawn from the left hand margin, A double space gap is maintained between the last line of the textual material and the first line of the footnote citations.
Although the footnote citations are single spaced, double spaces exist between two citations. Apart from placing the foot notes at the bottom of the page concerned the researcher can number them consecutively in respect of each chapter and place them at the end of each chapter.
Some of the standard abbreviations in bibliography or footnotes which may be used by the researcher are as follows:
Col: Column
Cols: Columns
et al (et alii) : and others
fig, figs : figure, figures
i.e. lidest : that is
Op. cit (opera citato): Previously cited
ed; eds; editor, editors e.g. (exempti gratia) : for example
Ibid (Ibidem): Same reference
P., PP.: Page, Pages
The research report should be of medium size, neither too short nor too bulky. Whereas a concise report fails to contain all the relevant facts and essential data, the very size of a voluminous report discourages the readers on its first appearance one way to solve the problem of the bulky report is to split it to two separate volumes, one for the main report and the other for containing the appendices, tables etc.
Although page numbers are to be indicated at each page of the report, these are not mentioned on the pages containing each division, such as the chapter, major sub- division, bibliography or appendix. Generally the page number is not indicated although continuity is maintained.
The proper space meant for indicating the page number is the upper right hand corner, one inch below the top of the page. Initially pagination is done on the final edited copy of the manuscript by using a light pencil and thereafter the manuscript is sent for final typing.
In a nut shell it can be stated that writing a research report in a simple and clear-cut manner is not at all an easy task. Actually it needs continuous reorganization, revision, deletion of exaggeration as the initial drafts are always considered inadequate. The researcher should always keep his mind open to criticism so as to develop a habit of learning objectivity and thereby bring substantial improvement through reorganization of the material.
A very common notion regarding report writing is that if the field study is perfectly completed and other necessary endeavours for research have been made, the researcher will not find it difficult to prepare the research report, but in reality report writing is an uphill task which demands that the researcher will have to take enough care to prepare the report in a clear-cut manner without any ambiguity.
The researcher should try to explain rather than convince the readers. He should try to make such sentences which reflect the real intentions. But in real terms very many problems are likely to crop up due to the personal limitations of the researcher or due to distortion of the main line of thought or even due to faulty methodology. The report may also lack in stating various stages of the development of methodology.
Another problem of research report relates to non- coverage of what was originally proposed to be covered, without having any clarification as to why the scope of study is narrowed down. Similar problem may arise in case the scope is widened. Omission of relevant data and gap between the tables of data and conclusions reached may at times, cause further problems in cognizing the genuineness and authenticity of the findings.
Failure to provide the report with the operational definition of the terms not only generates problem but also makes the task of report writing more difficult on the part of the report writer. Differences in meaning of the concepts make communication difficult.
Unless the basic concepts are made amply clear, the readers will not find it easy to appreciate or cognize the report. Goode and Hatt say that “the lack of clear system of abstraction means that we cannot indicate quickly and easily just how much knowledge is to be assumed and how much is to be presented.”
Inability of the report writer to clarify the problem in accordance with the level of understanding and satisfaction of the readers is yet another problem. Failure on the part of the report writer to ensure that the problem investigated has been stated clearly, defeats the very purpose of writing a research report. Goode and Hatt hold in this regard, “Note, however, that to the extent that the problem itself is not clearly identified, the writer must either risk confusion or write in tedious detail everything about the study which might be of interest to the other social scientists”
Lack of patience, negligence and carelessness in drafting cause further problem in research report. Therefore the report writer should always try to eschew extra consciousness or carelessness, failing which it will not only result in a lot of disservice to the study but also the endeavour put in the collection of data will go futile.
The use of purely technical and tedious terms creates another problem for the general readers who may be interested in understanding the research problem investigated. On the one hand the report writer cannot afford to delete the technical terms. On the other hand he should not lose sight of the target group. By and large the report is oriented towards the expectations of that group, not to be read by the experts on the subject. Careful use of technical vocabulary can serve both the purposes and can break the communication barrier.
The problem of report writing in respect of action oriented research is that of interpretation by the members of a small group comprising specialists as well as laymen, which may either implement or reject the recommendations of the study. Since society lays emphasis on the recommendations such research, the report writer should take sufficient care to make the report intelligible to all kinds of members of the small group.
Thus it is obvious in the above discussion that report writing is an uphill takes as it is required that the report should not only be intelligible to the laymen and specialists, but also make them tempt to go through it. This is possible only when the report maintains a balance between the understanding of the experts as well as laymen with the minimum use of technical terms, clarification of the scope of the study and justification of its coverage and findings.
The purpose of a field report in the social sciences is to describe the deliberate observation of people, places, and/or events and to analyze what has been observed in order to identify and categorize common themes in relation to the research problem underpinning the study. The content represents the researcher's interpretation of meaning found in data that has been gathered during one or more observational events.
Flick, Uwe. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection . London: SAGE Publications, 2018; Lofland, John, David Snow, Leon Anderson, and Lyn H. Lofland. Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, 2022; Baker, Lynda. "Observation: A Complex Research Method." Library Trends 55 (Summer 2006): 171-189.; Kellehear, Allan. The Unobtrusive Researcher: A Guide to Methods . New York: Routledge, 2020.
How to Begin
Field reports are most often assigned in disciplines of the applied social sciences [e.g., social work, anthropology, gerontology, criminal justice, education, law, the health care services] where it is important to build a bridge of relevancy between the theoretical concepts learned in the classroom and the practice of actually doing the work you are being taught to do. Field reports are also common in certain science disciplines [e.g., geology] but these reports are organized differently and serve a different purpose than what is described below.
Professors will assign a field report with the intention of improving your understanding of key theoretical concepts by applying methods of careful and structured observation of, and reflection about, people, places, or phenomena existing in their natural settings. Field reports facilitate the development of data collection techniques and observation skills and they help you to understand how theory applies to real world situations. Field reports are also an opportunity to obtain evidence through methods of observing professional practice that contribute to or challenge existing theories.
We are all observers of people, their interactions, places, and events; however, your responsibility when writing a field report is to conduct research based on data generated by the act of designing a specific study, deliberate observation, synthesis of key findings, and interpretation of their meaning.
When writing a field report you need to:
Techniques to Record Your Observations Although there is no limit to the type of data gathering techniques you can use, these are the most frequently used methods:
Note Taking This is the most common and easiest method of recording your observations. Tips for taking notes include: organizing some shorthand symbols beforehand so that recording basic or repeated actions does not impede your ability to observe, using many small paragraphs, which reflect changes in activities, who is talking, etc., and, leaving space on the page so you can write down additional thoughts and ideas about what’s being observed, any theoretical insights, and notes to yourself that are set aside for further investigation. See drop-down tab for additional information about note-taking.
Photography With the advent of smart phones, an almost unlimited number of high quality photographs can be taken of the objects, events, and people observed during a field study. Photographs can help capture an important moment in time as well as document details about the space where your observation takes place. Taking a photograph can save you time in documenting the details of a space that would otherwise require extensive note taking. However, be aware that flash photography could undermine your ability to observe unobtrusively so assess the lighting in your observation space; if it's too dark, you may need to rely on taking notes. Also, you should reject the idea that photographs represent some sort of "window into the world" because this assumption creates the risk of over-interpreting what they show. As with any product of data gathering, you are the sole instrument of interpretation and meaning-making, not the object itself. Video and Audio Recordings Video or audio recording your observations has the positive effect of giving you an unfiltered record of the observation event. It also facilitates repeated analysis of your observations. This can be particularly helpful as you gather additional information or insights during your research. However, these techniques have the negative effect of increasing how intrusive you are as an observer and will often not be practical or even allowed under certain circumstances [e.g., interaction between a doctor and a patient] and in certain organizational settings [e.g., a courtroom]. Illustrations/Drawings This does not refer to an artistic endeavor but, rather, refers to the possible need, for example, to draw a map of the observation setting or illustrating objects in relation to people's behavior. This can also take the form of rough tables, charts, or graphs documenting the frequency and type of activities observed. These can be subsequently placed in a more readable format when you write your field report. To save time, draft a table [i.e., columns and rows] on a separate piece of paper before an observation if you know you will be entering data in that way.
NOTE: You may consider using a laptop or other electronic device to record your notes as you observe, but keep in mind the possibility that the clicking of keys while you type or noises from your device can be obtrusive, whereas writing your notes on paper is relatively quiet and unobtrusive. Always assess your presence in the setting where you're gathering the data so as to minimize your impact on the subject or phenomenon being studied.
ANOTHER NOTE: Techniques of deliberate observation and data gathering are not innate skills; they are skills that must be learned and practiced in order to achieve proficiency. Before your first observation, practice the technique you plan to use in a setting similar to your study site [e.g., take notes about how people choose to enter checkout lines at a grocery store if your research involves examining the choice patterns of unrelated people forced to queue in busy social settings]. When the act of data gathering counts, you'll be glad you practiced beforehand.
YET ANOTHER NOTE: An issue rarely discussed in the literature about conducting field research is whether you should move around the study site while observing or remaining situated in one place. Moving around can be intrusive, but it facilitates observing people's behavior from multiple vectors. However, if you remain in one place throughout the observation [or during each observation], you will eventually blend into the background and diminish the chance of unintentionally influencing people's behavior. If the site has a complex set of interactions or interdependent activities [e.g., a play ground], consider moving around; if the study site is relatively fixed [e.g., a classroom], then consider staying in one place while observing.
Examples of Things to Document While Observing
Brief notes about all of these examples contextualize your observations; however, your observation notes will be guided primarily by your theoretical framework, keeping in mind that your observations will feed into and potentially modify or alter these frameworks.
Sampling Techniques
Sampling refers to the process used to select a portion of the population for study . Qualitative research, of which observation is one method of data gathering, is generally based on non-probability and purposive sampling rather than probability or random approaches characteristic of quantitatively-driven studies. Sampling in observational research is flexible and often continues until no new themes emerge from the data, a point referred to as data saturation.
All sampling decisions are made for the explicit purpose of obtaining the richest possible source of information to answer the research questions. Decisions about sampling assumes you know what you want to observe, what behaviors are important to record, and what research problem you are addressing before you begin the study. These questions determine what sampling technique you should use, so be sure you have adequately answered them before selecting a sampling method.
Ways to sample when conducting an observation include:
Alderks, Peter. Data Collection. Psychology 330 Course Documents. Animal Behavior Lab. University of Washington; Emerson, Robert M. Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and Formulations . 2nd ed. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 2001; Emerson, Robert M. et al. “Participant Observation and Fieldnotes.” In Handbook of Ethnography . Paul Atkinson et al., eds. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001), 352-368; Emerson, Robert M. et al. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes . 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2011; Ethnography, Observational Research, and Narrative Inquiry. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Hazel, Spencer. "The Paradox from Within: Research Participants Doing-Being-Observed." Qualitative Research 16 (August 2016): 446-457; Pace, Tonio. Writing Field Reports. Scribd Online Library; Presser, Jon and Dona Schwartz. “Photographs within the Sociological Research Process.” In Image-based Research: A Sourcebook for Qualitative Researchers . Jon Prosser, editor (London: Falmer Press, 1998), pp. 115-130; Pyrczak, Fred and Randall R. Bruce. Writing Empirical Research Reports: A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . 5th ed. Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing, 2005; Report Writing. UniLearning. University of Wollongong, Australia; Wolfinger, Nicholas H. "On Writing Fieldnotes: Collection Strategies and Background Expectancies.” Qualitative Research 2 (April 2002): 85-95; Writing Reports. Anonymous. The Higher Education Academy.
How you choose to format your field report is determined by the research problem, the theoretical framework that is driving your analysis, the observations that you make, and/or specific guidelines established by your professor. Since field reports do not have a standard format, it is worthwhile to determine from your professor what the preferred structure and organization should be before you begin to write. Note that field reports should be written in the past tense. With this in mind, most field reports in the social sciences include the following elements:
I. Introduction The introduction should describe the research problem, the specific objectives of your research, and the important theories or concepts underpinning your field study. The introduction should describe the nature of the organization or setting where you are conducting the observation, what type of observations you have conducted, what your focus was, when you observed, and the methods you used for collecting the data. Collectively, this descriptive information should support reasons why you chose the observation site and the people or events within it. You should also include a review of pertinent literature related to the research problem, particularly if similar methods were used in prior studies. Conclude your introduction with a statement about how the rest of the paper is organized.
II. Description of Activities
Your readers only knowledge and understanding of what happened will come from the description section of your report because they were not witnesses to the situation, people, or events that you are writing about. Given this, it is crucial that you provide sufficient details to place the analysis that will follow into proper context; don't make the mistake of providing a description without context. The description section of a field report is similar to a well written piece of journalism. Therefore, a useful approach to systematically describing the varying aspects of an observed situation is to answer the "Five W’s of Investigative Reporting." As Dubbels notes [p. 19], these are:
III. Interpretation and Analysis
Always place the analysis and interpretations of your field observations within the larger context of the theoretical assumptions and issues you described in the introduction. Part of your responsibility in analyzing the data is to determine which observations are worthy of comment and interpretation, and which observations are more general in nature. It is your theoretical framework that allows you to make these decisions. You need to demonstrate to the reader that you are conducting the field work through the eyes of an informed viewer and from the perspective of a casual observer.
Here are some questions to ask yourself when analyzing your observations:
NOTE: Only base your interpretations on what you have actually observed. Do not speculate or manipulate your observational data to fit into your study's theoretical framework.
IV. Conclusion and Recommendations
The conclusion should briefly recap of the entire study, reiterating the importance or significance of your observations. Avoid including any new information. You should also state any recommendations you may have based on the results of your study. Be sure to describe any unanticipated problems you encountered and note the limitations of your study. The conclusion should not be more than two or three paragraphs.
V. Appendix
This is where you would place information that is not essential to explaining your findings, but that supports your analysis [especially repetitive or lengthy information], that validates your conclusions, or that contextualizes a related point that helps the reader understand the overall report. Examples of information that could be included in an appendix are figures/tables/charts/graphs of results, statistics, pictures, maps, drawings, or, if applicable, transcripts of interviews. There is no limit to what can be included in the appendix or its format [e.g., a DVD recording of the observation site], provided that it is relevant to the study's purpose and reference is made to it in the report. If information is placed in more than one appendix ["appendices"], the order in which they are organized is dictated by the order they were first mentioned in the text of the report.
VI. References
List all sources that you consulted and obtained information from while writing your field report. Note that field reports generally do not include further readings or an extended bibliography. However, consult with your professor concerning what your list of sources should be included and be sure to write them in the preferred citation style of your discipline or is preferred by your professor [i.e., APA, Chicago, MLA, etc.].
Alderks, Peter. Data Collection. Psychology 330 Course Documents. Animal Behavior Lab. University of Washington; Dubbels, Brock R. Exploring the Cognitive, Social, Cultural, and Psychological Aspects of Gaming and Simulations . Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2018; Emerson, Robert M. Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and Formulations . 2nd ed. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 2001; Emerson, Robert M. et al. “Participant Observation and Fieldnotes.” In Handbook of Ethnography . Paul Atkinson et al., eds. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001), 352-368; Emerson, Robert M. et al. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes . 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2011; Ethnography, Observational Research, and Narrative Inquiry. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Pace, Tonio. Writing Field Reports. Scribd Online Library; Pyrczak, Fred and Randall R. Bruce. Writing Empirical Research Reports: A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . 5th ed. Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing, 2005; Report Writing. UniLearning. University of Wollongong, Australia; Wolfinger, Nicholas H. "On Writing Fieldnotes: Collection Strategies and Background Expectancies.” Qualitative Research 2 (April 2002): 85-95; Writing Reports. Anonymous. The Higher Education Academy.
Insight from top 5 papers.
A research report serves the purpose of presenting and explaining the findings of a research study. It is a means of communicating the methodology, results, and conclusions of the research to the scientific community and other interested parties. The report provides a detailed account of the research process, including the issues addressed, the data collected, and the analysis conducted. It aims to convince the reader of the validity and reliability of the conclusions drawn from the research. The report also emphasizes the importance of full disclosure and replicability, ensuring that another researcher can reproduce the study and verify the results. [1] [2] [4]
Title | Insight |
---|---|
- PDF Talk with Paper | |
PDF Talk with Paper | |
, - Talk with Paper | |
, Talk with Paper | |
, , PDF Talk with Paper |
The distinction between an article and a research report lies primarily in their structure, purpose, and the stage of research they represent. Articles, particularly research articles, are often peer-reviewed publications that present original research findings, while research reports serve as comprehensive documents detailing the research process and outcomes. ## Structure and Content - **Research Articles**: Typically include an introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections. They focus on presenting findings and are often subject to peer review before publication. - **Research Reports**: These documents provide a detailed account of the research process, including methodology, data collection, and analysis. They may be less formal and can serve various purposes, such as internal documentation or publication in scholarly journals. ## Purpose and Audience - **Research Articles**: Aim to disseminate new knowledge to the academic community and are often published in high-impact journals, which enhances their visibility and influence. - **Research Reports**: Serve as a comprehensive record of research activities, often intended for specific stakeholders or funding bodies, and may not undergo the same rigorous peer-review process. In summary, while both formats contribute to academic discourse, research articles emphasize findings and peer review, whereas research reports focus on documenting the research process comprehensively.
The purpose of reporting findings from a study is crucial for several reasons, primarily related to ethical obligations, knowledge dissemination, and the advancement of clinical practice. Reporting ensures that the contributions of trial participants are acknowledged and that the implicit contract between researchers and participants is honored, as participants expect their involvement to lead to advancements in medical knowledge . Furthermore, ethical considerations dictate that researchers have a responsibility to share findings, which not only informs future research but also enhances informed consent processes for subsequent trials . Poor reporting can lead to significant gaps in knowledge and may undermine trust in the research process, as it withholds critical information about treatment efficacy and safety . Thus, effective reporting is essential for fostering transparency, accountability, and the ethical conduct of research, ultimately benefiting both the scientific community and society at large .
Research purpose is multifaceted, encompassing the exploration, analysis, and prediction of various phenomena to contribute to scientific progress and address global challenges. It involves systematic inquiry to validate existing knowledge, theories, and practices, as well as to provide reliable and unbiased answers to questions. Research serves as a crucial tool in fields like social sciences, economy, medicine, and education, aiding in the development of knowledge, solving global problems, enhancing professional competencies, and improving teaching effectiveness. The significance of research lies in its ability to drive innovation, inform decision-making, and foster continuous improvement in diverse domains, emphasizing the necessity of ongoing efforts to advance knowledge and address real-world challenges effectively.
The research presented in the report utilized a data-based analysis conducted by UNESCO in partnership with Data-Pop Alliance, supplemented by original research by Economist Impact commissioned for the report and secondary research from recognized observatories . The study on older people's experiences during the pandemic employed a qualitative longitudinal approach, capturing their experiences over a 12-month period using online platforms and telephone interviews . The methodology for surface topography research involved various methods such as optical microscope, scanning electron microscope, atomic force microscope, profilometer, confocal microscope, interference microscope, and focus variation microscope to comprehensively assess the surface topography and tribological wear traces . The study on immigrant entrepreneurs in Cape Town used in-depth interviews to explore their social and economic experiences, highlighting the role of social and human capital in the creation and growth of their businesses . The study on board gender diversity in the Sri Lankan corporate community adopted a socio-legal approach to gain a contextual understanding of how the community perceives the introduction of rules on this topic .
The purpose of the research in the articles is as follows: - Andrianov et al. analyze the experience of using technologies for automatic checking of problem solutions in IT education to enhance teaching effectiveness and develop professional skills of students . - Tereshchenko and Shkolenko aim to research the current state of the air transport market, identify opportunities and threats, and develop directions for its future development . - Litvin and Litvin reconstruct the everyday life of historian Ivan Kripyakevich, highlighting his family environment, interests, collaborations, and the friendly atmosphere he created in his institution . - Khanis et al. discuss information security implementation techniques in different countries, analyze the legislation basis, and propose a technique to increase the share of prevented attacks against information systems in Russia . - Kopiyevska analyzes the main approaches to understanding modern cultural practices and their relationship with practical cultural studies, emphasizing the influence and interaction between the two .
Filipino authors uniquely portray romantic relationships through a blend of cultural nuances, imaginative storytelling, and socio-political contexts. Their works often reflect the complexities of identity, desire, and societal norms, creating a distinctive narrative landscape. ## Cultural Context and Imagination - Filipino romance fiction is characterized by anachronism and displacement, where foreign characters and settings are often depicted with liberties that reflect local imagination rather than accuracy. - The self-publishing collective #RomanceClass exemplifies how Filipino authors navigate both local and international markets, emphasizing the genre's adaptability and cultural relevance. ## Exploration of Desire and Identity - Themes of repressed desires and sexual identity are prevalent in Filipino literature, as seen in works analyzed through psychoanalytic lenses. Authors confront societal taboos, revealing the intricate interplay between sexuality and cultural identity. - The portrayal of gender roles in literature also reflects evolving societal norms, with male and female characters often engaging in traditionally assigned roles, yet increasingly challenging these conventions. While Filipino romance literature is rich in cultural specificity, it also faces challenges in representation and market dynamics, suggesting a need for ongoing exploration of these themes in contemporary contexts.
Psychological chronic stress significantly impacts the cardiovascular system, leading to various adverse health outcomes. Chronic stress activates the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, resulting in prolonged cortisol release, which can cause hypertension and increased heart rate. ## Mechanisms of Impact - **Hormonal Changes**: Chronic stress elevates cortisol levels, which can lead to vascular inflammation and arterial stiffness. - **Behavioral Factors**: Stress often results in unhealthy behaviors such as poor diet, lack of exercise, and smoking, further exacerbating cardiovascular risks. - **Autonomic Nervous System**: Stress activates the sympathetic nervous system, increasing heart rate and blood pressure, which can lead to heart disease over time. ## Long-term Consequences - **Increased Risk of Disease**: Prolonged exposure to stress is linked to a higher incidence of heart attacks and strokes. - **Psychosocial Factors**: Individuals with chronic stress may experience anxiety and depression, which are also risk factors for cardiovascular diseases. While chronic stress is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular issues, some studies suggest that resilience and coping strategies can mitigate these effects, highlighting the importance of psychological well-being in cardiovascular health.
Messick's validity theory is a comprehensive framework that emphasizes the multifaceted nature of validity in assessment. It identifies six key components that collectively support the validity of test scores and inferences drawn from them. ## Key Components of Messick's Validity Theory - **Content Validity**: Ensures that the test items adequately represent the construct being measured. For instance, studies have shown that language tests often lack definitive evidence for content validity. - **Construct Validity**: Involves the theoretical rationale behind the test and its alignment with the intended construct. This includes evidence of unidimensionality and measurement invariance, as demonstrated in various assessments. - **Consequential Validity**: Addresses the social implications of test scores, including both intended and unintended consequences. This aspect is crucial in understanding how test results affect policy and practice. - **Generalizability**: Refers to the extent to which test results can be generalized across different populations and contexts, which is vital for ensuring the reliability of inferences drawn from test scores. - **Substantive Validity**: Focuses on the relevance and appropriateness of the test content in relation to the construct being measured, ensuring that the test is meaningful in its application. - **Structural Validity**: Examines the internal structure of the test, ensuring that it accurately reflects the theoretical construct it aims to measure. While Messick's framework provides a robust approach to understanding validity, some critiques suggest that the complexity of real-world applications may challenge the clear delineation of these components, indicating a need for ongoing evaluation and adaptation in assessment practices.
The effective altruism movement is centered around maximizing the positive impact of altruistic actions through evidence-based approaches. Its key principles include impartiality, cause prioritization, and cost-effectiveness, guiding individuals to allocate resources where they can do the most good. ## Key Principles - **Impartiality**: Effective altruism emphasizes that every life has equal value, urging individuals to help those in extreme poverty or suffering, regardless of geographical or emotional proximity. - **Cause Prioritization**: The movement encourages prioritizing interventions based on their effectiveness. For instance, supporting malaria prevention is often highlighted due to its high cost-effectiveness, costing about $4,500 to save a life. - **Cost-Effectiveness**: Effective altruists focus on maximizing the impact of their donations, assessing various charitable interventions to determine which yield the greatest benefits per dollar spent. While effective altruism has gained traction, it faces criticism regarding its focus on quantifiable outcomes, which some argue may overlook the complexities of human suffering and moral obligations.
Applying Messick's validity theory to the assessment of complex skills and knowledge has significant implications for educational practices and test development. This framework emphasizes the multifaceted nature of validity, which is crucial for ensuring that assessments accurately reflect the constructs they intend to measure. ## Comprehensive Validity Framework - Messick's theory identifies six types of evidence necessary for validating assessments: content, structural, external, generalizability, substantive, and consequential validity. - This comprehensive approach helps educators and test developers understand the various dimensions of validity, ensuring that assessments are not only reliable but also relevant to the intended skills and knowledge. ## Social Consequences of Assessment - The application of Messick's framework highlights the social implications of test scores, emphasizing that assessments can lead to unintended consequences if they do not fully capture the intended constructs. - For instance, assessments that overlook social contexts may misrepresent a learner's abilities, leading to detrimental educational decisions. ## Practical Challenges - Despite its strengths, the complexity of Messick's framework can pose challenges for educators, particularly those unfamiliar with psychometric principles. - Simplified validation processes and checklists can aid teachers in effectively applying these principles in classroom assessments. In summary, while Messick's validity theory offers a robust framework for assessing complex skills, its practical application requires careful consideration of both educational contexts and the potential social consequences of assessment outcomes.
Here are some tips for writing lab reports! While lab reports are similar in structure and content to research articles published in scientific journals, they have a different purpose and audience, which will shape how you write them. The purpose of your lab report is to share the importance, analysis, and scope of your research. Your audience is your professor, instructor, or peers. While you probably won't be submitting your report to a journal for peer-review, it is still a good idea to adhere to the conventions and guidelines specified by your instructor, because writing these reports is really good practice for any science writing you may go on to do in your career!
"The research report is more than a narrative; it is a careful argument. The authors of a research report find themselves in the position of building a case for their research, not simply recounting actions and observation"
Penrose, A. M., & Katz, S. B. (2001). Writing in the sciences : exploring conventions of scientific discourse / Ann M. Penrose, Steven B. Katz . Pearson Custom Pub. Pp. 33
Avoid first person - It is best to use a passive, third person voice when describing your experiment and results.
Tenses -
Species - All species should be referred to in their full Latin name, in italics
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Email citation, add to collections.
Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.
Affiliation.
Purpose: Standards for reporting exist for many types of quantitative research, but currently none exist for the broad spectrum of qualitative research. The purpose of the present study was to formulate and define standards for reporting qualitative research while preserving the requisite flexibility to accommodate various paradigms, approaches, and methods.
Method: The authors identified guidelines, reporting standards, and critical appraisal criteria for qualitative research by searching PubMed, Web of Science, and Google through July 2013; reviewing the reference lists of retrieved sources; and contacting experts. Specifically, two authors reviewed a sample of sources to generate an initial set of items that were potentially important in reporting qualitative research. Through an iterative process of reviewing sources, modifying the set of items, and coding all sources for items, the authors prepared a near-final list of items and descriptions and sent this list to five external reviewers for feedback. The final items and descriptions included in the reporting standards reflect this feedback.
Results: The Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) consists of 21 items. The authors define and explain key elements of each item and provide examples from recently published articles to illustrate ways in which the standards can be met.
Conclusions: The SRQR aims to improve the transparency of all aspects of qualitative research by providing clear standards for reporting qualitative research. These standards will assist authors during manuscript preparation, editors and reviewers in evaluating a manuscript for potential publication, and readers when critically appraising, applying, and synthesizing study findings.
PubMed Disclaimer
Full text sources.
NCBI Literature Resources
MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer
The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.
This paper describes the sample methodology section of a research paper effects of a program of supported perfect research paper outline SE for persons with severe mental illness. The population of interest for this study is all adults with SMI residing in the U. With this purpose, it will paer conducted the qualitative and quantitative recommendation format in research paper, sample methodology section of a research paper allows gaining the most relevant results about the relations between the alcohol use and the school performance. The PMC legacy view paaper also be available for a limited time. Academic Phrases for Writing Abstract Section of a Research Paper An abstract is a self-contained and short synopsis that describes a larger work. Referencing in art and design. Explain the procedures step-by-step by splitting the main section into multiple sub-sections. How can we improve it? In addition, the MJSW was always accessible by cellular telephone, and could be called by the participant or the employer at any time. Second, paragraphs and text should be double spaced and the start of each paragraph should be indented. For sample references which are not included with this paper, you should consult the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 4th Edition. Due to unexpected difficulties in coping with job stress, 19 Supported Employment participants had to be transferred into the sheltered workshop prior to the posttest.
Taking a peek into the unknown is the job of professors. With their research, they ask the big, knotty questions, the questions at the limits of human understanding for which answers are not easily found.
“It is challenging,” says Joanna Carey , associate professor of environmental science and the Debi and Andy Butler Term Chair. “Basically, our job is to figure out knowledge that nobody knows yet.”
Babson College may not be a large research institution, but its professors still produce a sizable amount of research in a wide range of fields, from medicine and the environment, to history and culture, to technology and innovation, to business and entrepreneurship. In this article, five Babson professors discuss their diverse work, giving a greater appreciation of the breadth and significance of research at the College.
BABSON MAGAZINE : Read the complete Summer 2024 issue .
Their research, along with that of their colleagues, flourishes in a supportive environment. The College helps fund research endeavors and trips to academic conferences, while giving professors the freedom to pursue their scholarly interests.
Alumni donors, meanwhile, have funded numerous term chairs, which allow professors to spend more time on their research, and professors at the tight-knit school frequently collaborate across disciplines. “We challenge each other to solve problems in different ways,” says Dessislava Pachamanova , professor of analytics and computational finance and the Zwerling Family Endowed Term Chair.
The end result is research that influences and inspires, that makes an impact around the globe, that helps us understand the world and our place in it.
Professors’ research also makes its way into the classroom. “The research they’re doing outside of the classroom informs and strengthens their approach within it,” says Babson President Stephen Spinelli Jr. MBA’92, PhD . “That value proposition enhances our academic rigor and ensures Babson remains at the forefront of emerging trends in entrepreneurship and beyond.”
Imagine a stream trickling down a mountain, as it makes its way to a river, which widens as it reaches the sea. That water is majestic and immense, and it carries with it many things on its journey. “Every time I see a river, I think, ‘That’s a lot of material being moved,’ ” says Joanna Carey, associate professor of environmental science and the Debi and Andy Butler Term Chair.
One of those things in the water is silicon, the second most abundant element in Earth’s crust and a frequent subject of Carey’s research. Silicon moves from the crust, into plants, into rivers, and finally, into the ocean.
Following that path and examining watery places such as rivers, marshes, and estuaries, Carey’s research demonstrates how human activity is causing drastic changes in the amount of silicon as it cycles through the world. Those changes have a story to tell about land use, about the food chain, about carbon dioxide levels, and about our planet as it warms.
Consider the microscopic but mighty diatoms, for instance, an abundant alga that requires silicon to grow. What will the changing levels of silicon mean for these organisms responsible for more than 20% of the oxygen produced every year on Earth?
“They are really important,” Carey says. “Their importance on a global scale can’t be overestimated.”
For the last few years, Carey has led a team that created and examined the largest data set in the world on river silicon chemistry with funding from the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis. She’ll soon be looking at data from all seven continents for a project funded by the United States Geological Survey.
To be a scientist now, trying to bring a clearer understanding of climate change’s formidable and far-reaching impact, is to perform critical work.
“It is very fundamental science,” Carey says. “There is an urgency in what we are doing.”
Much is at stake, including the future of the students she teaches in the classroom. “This is an issue they will deal with their whole lives,” Carey says.
Technology evolves fast. For those in the workplace, that speed can feel overwhelming. “There is a lot of risk of people falling behind,” says Ruben Mancha , associate professor of information systems.
Those workers falling behind are a major concern of Mancha’s research. He looks at how organizations can adopt technology and transform how they operate in a responsible way, by considering the many human implications of the changes they’re implementing. “What is different about my framing is that responsibility,” he says. “It’s focused on the human side. It’s a people-first approach.”
New tech, such as an artificial intelligence tool like ChatGPT, actually can have a positive effect on employees’ workdays, taking on tedious tasks and freeing them to focus on more essential matters.
This benefit only works, though, if workers are confident using these tools. The line between those who are tech literate and those who are not is a stark one. “Those who can work with the technology will use it,” Mancha says. “Those who can’t will be replaced.”
In his research, Mancha examines two ways that organizations can not only guide employees through technological changes but also empower them. One way is by introducing them to low-code development platforms, which offer a much easier way to code, thus enabling many more employees to become developers. The second way is to launch a sustained and effective program for upskilling, creating a workforce that is competent and confident with tech.
Such measures do more than train an employee in the latest and greatest. They also change a workforce’s mindset. Give employees a new program they know how to use, and suddenly they have greater power to transform and innovate. “It changes how people see themselves and how they use technology,” Mancha says. “It’s about bringing the innovation culture to the enterprise.”
Mancha hopes decision makers in business will take his research to heart, and he’s excited to share it with students in the classroom. Before becoming a professor, he worked as a lab scientist in biotech. Research is something that comes naturally to him.
“It is my way of thinking,” he says.
Unfortunately, the work of the International Committee of the Red Cross is seemingly never-ending. The essential organization operates in war zones—in Ukraine, in the Gaza Strip, and in conflict areas far removed from the world’s spotlight. “There are fires everywhere,” says Dessislava Pachamanova, professor of analytics and computational finance and the Zwerling Family Endowed Term Chair.
The work is not only relentless, but it is also costly and logistically challenging. Because of the alarming number of conflicts around the world in recent years, the organization faced a substantial funding shortfall. As a result, a team composed of Pachamanova, other researchers, and supply chain coordinators within the organization sought to determine how to best allocate medical supplies for where they need to go.
This was a tricky thing to figure out. Ship too many supplies, and costly medications may sit unused and expire. Ship too little, and people may not receive the critical, lifesaving supplies they need. For more than a year, Pachamanova and the group looked at the issue.
Ultimately, they developed an inventory management decision support system that was rolled out across a dozen medical distribution centers in Africa, the Middle East, and Ukraine in 2023. By reducing the inventory levels of medical supplies by nearly a quarter with virtually no negative effect on service, the system saved the Red Cross a significant amount of money while facilitating a collaborative planning process across the organization. “The Red Cross considers it a great success,” Pachamanova says.
This is exactly the type of result she is seeking with her research. “I am looking for impact. That is the main thing that drives me,” says Pachamanova, who has applied her expertise in optimization, analytics, machine learning, and simulation to fields as diverse as finance, logistics, and health care.
Pachamanova wants to incorporate her experience working with the Red Cross in a new Babson class she is designing. “I want to introduce students to this kind of experience,” she says, “where you go in, you understand the big problem, but identifying how to start a solution is very hard, and you won’t know where you’ll end up.”
A company is not an island. Its actions are not secluded. Rather, they ripple outward. A company’s supply chain, its partners, its manufacturing, its customers—all of these relationships, all of these connections, operate within one intertwined system that has an impact on communities and the environment.
The research of Sinan Erzurumlu , professor of innovation and operations management, concerns itself with these systems in which organizations operate. Lying at the intersection of business, society, and the environment, his work focuses on how companies can make decisions that are both sustainable and innovative.
When looking at a company’s actions in his research, Erzurumlu typically asks a direct question: Who does this benefit? “It could benefit a community. It could benefit the planet,” he says. “That perspective drives me a lot.”
The goal is to build a more sustainable future, but talking and researching about sustainability, such an immense, complex, and daunting challenge, is not easy. “I think sustainability is a human mindset problem,” Erzurumlu says. “It’s not just reducing carbon emissions. It’s about changing that mindset. We need to make that transition to a sustainable future. Convincing people to do that is a hard job.”
Large organizations also can’t simply transition into sustainable businesses overnight. Making integral changes is like trying to turn a cargo ship. “It’s a process,” Erzurumlu says. “They can’t make the turn immediately.”
In one recent research article he co-authored, Erzurumlu looked at the systems-thinking approach that three companies—retailers of household products, fashion, and beverages, respectively—took to sustainability. The companies, among other measures, sought to limit the water they used in their operations, reduce the use of hazardous chemicals, and collect waste to recycle and remake into new products.
He hopes other companies can learn from their efforts. He also hopes such research will give his students real-world insights about sustainability. “I think teaching is as important as being a researcher,” he says. “I see the classroom as an outlet for my research. Teaching about my research is an extension of my scholarly identity.”
Hospitals are full of caring, smart people striving to deliver the best treatment possible. Helping them with that mission is what Wiljeana Glover tries to achieve in her research.
To conduct her research, Glover likes to leave her desk and work on site, embedded with those on the front lines of health care. “When I can, I am physically going into hospitals, observing, getting to know clinicians,” says the Stephen C. and Carmella R. Kletjian Foundation Distinguished Professor of Global Healthcare Entrepreneurship.
“That is fun for me and helps me understand how they do the work they do.”
Glover often works with hospitals and clinics to understand how they identify and implement improvements, whether a new procedure or innovation. The goal is to make sure that these improvements support patients equitably. Equity in care, for people of color, for women, can remain elusive.
Clinicians typically see her as a partner. “In some cases, they see me as part of their innovation or improvement team,” Glover says. “They appreciate the insights they are receiving along the way.”
In a recent research article she co-authored, Glover looked at quality improvement efforts at medical centers and how those organizations can make a sustained commitment to addressing equity. Data measurement, team composition, and the need for ongoing actions were all examined. “How do we not think of equity as a one off?” Glover says. “How do we build in equitable practice? How does it become part of the way we do things?”
Glover also serves as the founding faculty director of Babson’s Kerry Murphy Healey Center for Health Innovation and Entrepreneurship. In addition to studying equity, the center’s affiliated faculty conducts research on healthcare startups, the impact of artificial intelligence and analytics, and entrepreneurial training for clinicians and scientists.
Glover praises the spirit of collaboration she sees in her fellow faculty members, who share ideas with one another and work together on research. “It is one of my favorite things about doing research at Babson,” she says. “It really is a part of the secret sauce of research here.”
Posted in Insights , Outcomes
Tagged Entrepreneurship Education , Faculty , Research , Babson Magazine
More from Babson Magazine »
Latest stories.
More babson.
Computer Science – CS 7980: Research Capstone | |
Master’s | |
20 | |
, Associate Teaching Professor, Khoury College of Computer Science |
He developed a custom GPT (chatbot) that students can use to get formative feedback on their research papers. He calls it the “Research Capstone Advisor.” Students also get feedback from the instructor and the TAs, but this gives them one more channel of feedback, since getting writing feedback from multiple sources is valuable.
The course is attended by many career-changers for whom it is not uncommon to experience impostor syndrome as they move into a coding career. Many also do not have English as their first language, so there is additional anxiety for them around that. The purpose was to provide an additional source of very friendly but constructive writing feedback that would be available whenever they needed it.
Students would learn about the strengths and weaknesses of their report from the chatbot and have an opportunity to improve the document. After that, the final report was reviewed by the instructor and other faculty members (they wanted the process to be similar to that of submitting a paper to a conference). Students were happy to get the feedback. Also, since the criticism was coming from a chatbot and not from a professor, they were less discouraged by it (they knew it is not “personal”).
If you are going to offer or require AI use in your teaching, it is important to consider who has access to the tools. Because this bot uses ChatGPT 4o, which requires a subscription, I would have students send me their drafts, use my own subscription to run the draft through ChatGPT, and then send them its output. It will be a huge step forward when students can access something like this 24 hours a day, and as many times as they need to, on their own.
Step-by-Step Instructor Directions for Generating the Case Studies
This requires ChatGPT 4o, so you need to create an account if you don’t have one, and then log in. | |
Choose “Explore GPTs” and then click button. | |
Enter responses to each of the prompts in the form, which is shown in the screenshot below.
| |
In the Instructions field, enter the following prompt: The Research Capstone Advisor is akin to a kind but experienced professor or mentor, specializing in computer science research papers. It adopts a casual, supportive tone, making students feel at ease while navigating the complexities of academic writing. This GPT focuses on key sections of research papers, providing clear and concise feedback. It encourages independent thinking and problem-solving, guiding students towards higher standards of professionalism in their writing. The feedback is structured to be insightful yet allows room for students to apply their creativity and understanding. This approach fosters a comfortable learning environment where students feel supported and motivated to improve their work. | |
In the Conversation Starters fields, specify what kind of feedback you want ChatGPT to provide. | |
Click the button. You will be given options about whether this GPT is just for you, or whether you want to share with others by sending a link. You can give your students the link, though I used it in class to make sure everyone had access to it. |
Return to AI Gallery Home
With the emerging forces of online and digital products, scholars keenly captured digital literacy and have new research dimensions. The purpose of this study is to present a bibliometric analysis of digital literacy using CiteSpace and to explore the categories, themes and research evolution in digital literacy. A total of 9042 bibliographic records were retrieved from the WoS Core Collection between 1990 and 2024. With CiteSpace, this paper conducted keywords co-occurrence analysis, reference co-citation analysis, categories co-occurring analysis, landscape view, timeline view, etc. to identify the themes, hotspots, and research evolution of digital literacy research. The results demonstrates that education & educational research, health care sciences & services, and public, environmental & occupational health are the top 3 research categories to which the research of digital literacy belongs. By combining the main clusters and their respective keywords, eight prominent themes were generated. In the timeline view, clusters such as health literacy , digital literacy and digital storytellin g are with strong professional vitality and good sustainability, especially cluster digital literacy . The timeline visualization reveals three periods of development of digital literacy research. This study can serve as a fundamental and important support, provide directional guide in the study of digital literacy and contribute to researchers and educators who want to study digital teaching and learning or educational technology for future research in this field.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Subscribe and save.
Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Rent this article via DeepDyve
Institutional subscriptions
Data will be made available upon request.
Ahmadvand, A., Kavanagh, D., Clark, M., Drennan, J., & Nissen, L. (2019). Trends and visibility of digital health as a keyword in articles by JMIR publications in the new millennium: Bibliographic-bibliometric analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research , 21 (12), e10477. https://doi.org/10.2196/10477
Article Google Scholar
Arcury, T. A., Sandberg, J. C., Melius, K. P., Quandt, S. A., Leng, X., Latulipe, C., & Bertoni, A. G. (2020). Older adult internet use and eHealth literacy. Journal of Applied Gerontology , 39 (2), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464818807468
Baker, D. W., Parker, R. M., Williams, M. V., & Clark, W. S. (1998). Health literacy and the risk of hospital admission. Journal of General Internal Medicine , 13 (12), 791–798. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00242.x
Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. Digital Literacies: Concepts Policies and Practices , 30 (2008), 17–32.
Google Scholar
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology , 39 (5), 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x
Bin Naeem, S., & Kamel Boulos, M. N. (2021). COVID-19 misinformation online and health literacy: A brief overview. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 18 (15), 8091. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18158091
Buchholz, B. A., DeHart, J., & Moorman, G. (2020). Digital citizenship during a global pandemic: Moving beyond digital literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy , 64 (1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1076
Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., & Punie, Y. (2017). DigComp 2.1: The digital competence framework for citizens. https://doi.org/10.2760/38842
Cetindamar Kozanoglu, D., & Abedin, B. (2021). Understanding the role of employees in digital transformation: Conceptualization of digital literacy of employees as a multi-dimensional organizational affordance. Journal of Enterprise Information Management , 34 (6), 1649–1672. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-01-2020-0010
Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpaceII: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology , 57 (3), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi
Chen, C. (2017). Science mapping: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of data and Information Science , 2 (2), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2017-0006
Article MathSciNet Google Scholar
Chen, C., & Song, M. (2019). Visualizing a field of research: A methodology of systematic scientometric reviews. PloS One , 14 (10), e0223994. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223994
Chen, C., Hu, Z., Liu, S., & Tseng, H. (2012). Emerging trends in regenerative medicine: A scientometric analysis in CiteSpace. Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy , 12 (5), 593–608. https://doi.org/10.1517/14712598.2012.674507
Choi, N. G., & DiNitto, D. M. (2013). The digital divide among low-income homebound older adults: Internet use patterns, eHealth literacy, and attitudes toward computer/Internet use. Journal of Medical Internet Research , 15 (5), e93. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2645
Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. J. (2014). Handbook of research on new literacies . Routledge.
Collins, J. (1995). Literacy and literacies. Annual Review of Anthropology , 24 (1), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.000451
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022). The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology , 1 (1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y
Eldred, J. C., & Mortensen, P. (1992). Reading literacy narratives. College English , 54 (5), 512–539. https://doi.org/10.2307/378153
Falloon, G. (2020). From digital literacy to digital competence: The teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Educational Technology Research and Development , 68 , 2449–2472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09767-4
García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2023). The perception of Artificial Intelligence in educational contexts after the launch of ChatGPT: Disruption or panic? Education in the Knowledge Society , 24 . https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.31279 . Article e31279.
García-Peñalvo, F. J., Largo, L., F., & Vidal, J. (2023). The new reality of education in the face of advances in generative artificial intelligence. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.27.1.37716
Gilster, P., & Glister, P. (1997). Digital literacy . Wiley Computer Pub.
Goyal, K., & Kumar, S. (2021). Financial literacy: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Consumer Studies , 45 (1), 80–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12605
Guess, A. M., Lerner, M., Lyons, B., Montgomery, J. M., Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., & Sircar, N. (2020). A digital media literacy intervention increases discernment between mainstream and false news in the United States and India. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 117 (27), 15536–15545. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.192049811
Guo, Y., Hao, Z., Zhao, S., Gong, J., & Yang, F. (2020). Artificial intelligence in health care: Bibliometric analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research , 22 (7), e18228. https://doi.org/10.2196/18228
Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na (t) ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the net generation. Sociological Inquiry , 80 (1), 92–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00317.x
Hatlevik, O. E., Throndsen, I., Loi, M., & Gudmundsdottir, G. B. (2018). Students’ ICT self-efficacy and computer and information literacy: Determinants and relationships. Computers & Education , 118 , 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.011
Hutchison, A., Beschorner, B., & Schmidt-Crawford, D. (2012). Exploring the use of the iPad for literacy learning. The Reading Teacher , 66 (1), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01090
Ito, M. (2013). Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media . MIT Press.
Jewitt, C., & Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality, literacy and school English. The Routledge international handbook of English, language and literacy teaching (pp. 342–352). Routledge.
Kozyreva, A., Lewandowsky, S., & Hertwig, R. (2020). Citizens versus the internet: Confronting digital challenges with cognitive tools. Psychological Science in the Public Interest , 21 (3), 103–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/152910062094670
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2011). New literacies: Everyday practices and social learning . McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Leander, K., & Boldt, G. (2013). Rereading a pedagogy of multiliteracies bodies, texts, and emergence. Journal of Literacy Research , 45 (1), 22–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X12468587
Lee, C. D. (1992). Literacy, cultural diversiiy, and instruction. Education and Urban Society , 24 (2), 279–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124592024002008
Lee, T., Lee, B. K., & Lee-Geiller, S. (2020). The effects of information literacy on trust in government websites: Evidence from an online experiment. International Journal of Information Management , 52 , 102098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102098
Leu, D. J., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, D. K., Henry, L. A., & Reinking, D. (2008). Research on instruction and assessment in the new literacies of online reading comprehension. Comprehension Instruction: Research-based best Practices , 2 , 321–346.
Leu, D. J., Forzani, E., Burlingame, C., Kulikowich, J., Sedransk, N., Coiro, J., & Kennedy, C. (2013). The new literacies of online research and comprehension: Assessing and preparing students for the 21st century with Common Core State standards. Quality Reading Instruction in the age of Common Core Standards , 219 , 236. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0865.pub2
Leu, D. J., Forzani, E., Rhoads, C., Maykel, C., Kennedy, C., & Timbrell, N. (2015). The new literacies of online research and comprehension: Rethinking the reading achievement gap. Reading Research Quarterly , 50 (1), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.85
Marín, V. I., & Castaneda, L. (2023). Developing digital literacy for teaching and learning. In Handbook of open, distance and digital education (pp. 1089–1108). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0351-9_64-1
Martin, A., & Grudziecki, J. (2006). DigEuLit: Concepts and tools for digital literacy development. Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences , 5 (4), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.11120/ital.2006.05040249
Martins Van Jaarsveld, G. (2020). The effects of COVID-19 among the elderly population: A case for closing the digital divide. Frontiers in Psychiatry , 11 , 577427. https://doi.org/10.3389/psyt.2020.577427
Miller, P. J., Wiley, A. R., Fung, H., & Liang, C. H. (1997). Personal storytelling as a medium of socialization in Chinese and American families. Child Development , 68 (3), 557–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1997.tb01958.x
Neter, E., & Brainin, E. (2012). eHealth literacy: Extending the digital divide to the realm of health information. Journal of Medical Internet Research , 14 (1), e19. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1619
Pangrazio, L. (2016). Reconceptualising critical digital literacy. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education , 37 (2), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2014.942836
Patil, U., Kostareva, U., Hadley, M., Manganello, J. A., Okan, O., Dadaczynski, K., & Sentell, T. (2021). Health literacy, digital health literacy, and COVID-19 pandemic attitudes and behaviors in US college students: Implications for interventions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 18 (6), 3301. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18063301
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2021). The psychology of fake news. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 25 (5), 388–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.02.007
Pettersson, F. (2020). Understanding digitalization and educational change in school by means of activity theory and the levels of learning concept. Education and Information Technologies , 26 (1), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10239-8
Pool, C. R. (1997). A new digital literacy a conversation with Paul Gilster. Educational Leadership , 55 , 6–11.
Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation , 25 , 348.
Reddy, P., Sharma, B., & Chaudhary, K. (2020). Digital literacy: A review of literature. International Journal of Technoethics (IJT) , 11 (2), 65–94. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJT.20200701.oa1
Scheerder, A., Van Deursen, A., & Van Dijk, J. (2017). Determinants of internet skills, uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second-and third-level digital divide. Telematics and Informatics , 34 (8), 1607–1624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.07.007
Spante, M., Hashemi, S. S., Lundin, M., & Algers, A. (2018). Digital competence and digital literacy in higher education research: Systematic review of concept use. Cogent Education , 5 (1), 1519143. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1519143
Takacs, Z. K., Swart, E. K., & Bus, A. G. (2015). Benefits and pitfalls of multimedia and interactive features in technology-enhanced storybooks: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research , 85 (4), 698–739. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314566989
Valverde-Berrocoso, J., Garrido-Arroyo, M. C., Burgos-Videla, C., & Morales-Cevallos, M. B. (2020). Trends in educational research about e-learning: A systematic literature review (2009–2018). Sustainability , 12 (12), 5153. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125153
Van Der Vaart, R., & Drossaert, C. (2017). Development of the digital health literacy instrument: Measuring a broad spectrum of health 1.0 and health 2.0 skills. Journal of Medical Internet Research , 19 (1), e27. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6709
van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Helsper, E., & Eynon, R. (2014). Measuring digital skills: From digital skills to tangible outcomes project report . The London School of Economics and Political Science.
Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & De Haan, J. (2017). The relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. Computers in Human Behavior , 72 , 577–588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.010
Yang, K., Hu, Y., & Qi, H. (2022). Digital health literacy: Bibliometric analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research , 24 (7), e35816. https://doi.org/10.2196/35816
Download references
The researchers would like to thank SEGI University Malaysia.
This study is funded by the provincial humanities and social science project of Jiangxi Provincial Department of Education of China Research on the Construction and Development of Teachers’ Digitalization Teaching Ability in the Post-pandemic Times (No: JY20104). This is the phased research result.
Authors and affiliations.
School of Chemistry and Materials, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China
Dongping Wu
Faculty of Education, Language, Psychology, and Music, SEGI University, Kota Damansara, Selangor, Malaysia
Sheiladevi Sukumaran & Hongnan You
School of Foreign Languages, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330045, China
Xiaomin Zhi, Wenjing Zhou, Lihua Li & Hongnan You
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Hongnan You : Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Validation, Supervision, Project administration, Methodology, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Dongping Wu : Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Validation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Sheiladevi Sukumaran : Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Methodology, Conceptualization. Xiaomin Zhi : Writing – review & editing. Wenjing Zhou : Writing – review & editing. Lihua Li : Writing – review & editing.
Correspondence to Hongnan You .
Conflict of interest.
There is no conflict of interest for any of the participants.
Publisher’s note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
Reprints and permissions
Wu, D., Sukumaran, S., Zhi, X. et al. Categories, themes and research evolution of the study of digital literacy: a bibliometric analysis. Educ Inf Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12955-x
Download citation
Received : 30 April 2024
Accepted : 06 August 2024
Published : 07 September 2024
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12955-x
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
Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers
Peer Reviewed
Article metrics.
CrossRef Citations
Altmetric Score
PDF Downloads
Academic journals, archives, and repositories are seeing an increasing number of questionable research papers clearly produced using generative AI. They are often created with widely available, general-purpose AI applications, most likely ChatGPT, and mimic scientific writing. Google Scholar easily locates and lists these questionable papers alongside reputable, quality-controlled research. Our analysis of a selection of questionable GPT-fabricated scientific papers found in Google Scholar shows that many are about applied, often controversial topics susceptible to disinformation: the environment, health, and computing. The resulting enhanced potential for malicious manipulation of society’s evidence base, particularly in politically divisive domains, is a growing concern.
Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås, Sweden
Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University, Sweden
Division of Environmental Communication, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden
The use of ChatGPT to generate text for academic papers has raised concerns about research integrity. Discussion of this phenomenon is ongoing in editorials, commentaries, opinion pieces, and on social media (Bom, 2023; Stokel-Walker, 2024; Thorp, 2023). There are now several lists of papers suspected of GPT misuse, and new papers are constantly being added. 1 See for example Academ-AI, https://www.academ-ai.info/ , and Retraction Watch, https://retractionwatch.com/papers-and-peer-reviews-with-evidence-of-chatgpt-writing/ . While many legitimate uses of GPT for research and academic writing exist (Huang & Tan, 2023; Kitamura, 2023; Lund et al., 2023), its undeclared use—beyond proofreading—has potentially far-reaching implications for both science and society, but especially for their relationship. It, therefore, seems important to extend the discussion to one of the most accessible and well-known intermediaries between science, but also certain types of misinformation, and the public, namely Google Scholar, also in response to the legitimate concerns that the discussion of generative AI and misinformation needs to be more nuanced and empirically substantiated (Simon et al., 2023).
Google Scholar, https://scholar.google.com , is an easy-to-use academic search engine. It is available for free, and its index is extensive (Gusenbauer & Haddaway, 2020). It is also often touted as a credible source for academic literature and even recommended in library guides, by media and information literacy initiatives, and fact checkers (Tripodi et al., 2023). However, Google Scholar lacks the transparency and adherence to standards that usually characterize citation databases. Instead, Google Scholar uses automated crawlers, like Google’s web search engine (Martín-Martín et al., 2021), and the inclusion criteria are based on primarily technical standards, allowing any individual author—with or without scientific affiliation—to upload papers to be indexed (Google Scholar Help, n.d.). It has been shown that Google Scholar is susceptible to manipulation through citation exploits (Antkare, 2020) and by providing access to fake scientific papers (Dadkhah et al., 2017). A large part of Google Scholar’s index consists of publications from established scientific journals or other forms of quality-controlled, scholarly literature. However, the index also contains a large amount of gray literature, including student papers, working papers, reports, preprint servers, and academic networking sites, as well as material from so-called “questionable” academic journals, including paper mills. The search interface does not offer the possibility to filter the results meaningfully by material type, publication status, or form of quality control, such as limiting the search to peer-reviewed material.
To understand the occurrence of ChatGPT (co-)authored work in Google Scholar’s index, we scraped it for publications, including one of two common ChatGPT responses (see Appendix A) that we encountered on social media and in media reports (DeGeurin, 2024). The results of our descriptive statistical analyses showed that around 62% did not declare the use of GPTs. Most of these GPT-fabricated papers were found in non-indexed journals and working papers, but some cases included research published in mainstream scientific journals and conference proceedings. 2 Indexed journals mean scholarly journals indexed by abstract and citation databases such as Scopus and Web of Science, where the indexation implies journals with high scientific quality. Non-indexed journals are journals that fall outside of this indexation. More than half (57%) of these GPT-fabricated papers concerned policy-relevant subject areas susceptible to influence operations. To avoid increasing the visibility of these publications, we abstained from referencing them in this research note. However, we have made the data available in the Harvard Dataverse repository.
The publications were related to three issue areas—health (14.5%), environment (19.5%) and computing (23%)—with key terms such “healthcare,” “COVID-19,” or “infection”for health-related papers, and “analysis,” “sustainable,” and “global” for environment-related papers. In several cases, the papers had titles that strung together general keywords and buzzwords, thus alluding to very broad and current research. These terms included “biology,” “telehealth,” “climate policy,” “diversity,” and “disrupting,” to name just a few. While the study’s scope and design did not include a detailed analysis of which parts of the articles included fabricated text, our dataset did contain the surrounding sentences for each occurrence of the suspicious phrases that formed the basis for our search and subsequent selection. Based on that, we can say that the phrases occurred in most sections typically found in scientific publications, including the literature review, methods, conceptual and theoretical frameworks, background, motivation or societal relevance, and even discussion. This was confirmed during the joint coding, where we read and discussed all articles. It became clear that not just the text related to the telltale phrases was created by GPT, but that almost all articles in our sample of questionable articles likely contained traces of GPT-fabricated text everywhere.
Evidence hacking and backfiring effects
Generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) can be used to produce texts that mimic scientific writing. These texts, when made available online—as we demonstrate—leak into the databases of academic search engines and other parts of the research infrastructure for scholarly communication. This development exacerbates problems that were already present with less sophisticated text generators (Antkare, 2020; Cabanac & Labbé, 2021). Yet, the public release of ChatGPT in 2022, together with the way Google Scholar works, has increased the likelihood of lay people (e.g., media, politicians, patients, students) coming across questionable (or even entirely GPT-fabricated) papers and other problematic research findings. Previous research has emphasized that the ability to determine the value and status of scientific publications for lay people is at stake when misleading articles are passed off as reputable (Haider & Åström, 2017) and that systematic literature reviews risk being compromised (Dadkhah et al., 2017). It has also been highlighted that Google Scholar, in particular, can be and has been exploited for manipulating the evidence base for politically charged issues and to fuel conspiracy narratives (Tripodi et al., 2023). Both concerns are likely to be magnified in the future, increasing the risk of what we suggest calling evidence hacking —the strategic and coordinated malicious manipulation of society’s evidence base.
The authority of quality-controlled research as evidence to support legislation, policy, politics, and other forms of decision-making is undermined by the presence of undeclared GPT-fabricated content in publications professing to be scientific. Due to the large number of archives, repositories, mirror sites, and shadow libraries to which they spread, there is a clear risk that GPT-fabricated, questionable papers will reach audiences even after a possible retraction. There are considerable technical difficulties involved in identifying and tracing computer-fabricated papers (Cabanac & Labbé, 2021; Dadkhah et al., 2023; Jones, 2024), not to mention preventing and curbing their spread and uptake.
However, as the rise of the so-called anti-vaxx movement during the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing obstruction and denial of climate change show, retracting erroneous publications often fuels conspiracies and increases the following of these movements rather than stopping them. To illustrate this mechanism, climate deniers frequently question established scientific consensus by pointing to other, supposedly scientific, studies that support their claims. Usually, these are poorly executed, not peer-reviewed, based on obsolete data, or even fraudulent (Dunlap & Brulle, 2020). A similar strategy is successful in the alternative epistemic world of the global anti-vaccination movement (Carrion, 2018) and the persistence of flawed and questionable publications in the scientific record already poses significant problems for health research, policy, and lawmakers, and thus for society as a whole (Littell et al., 2024). Considering that a person’s support for “doing your own research” is associated with increased mistrust in scientific institutions (Chinn & Hasell, 2023), it will be of utmost importance to anticipate and consider such backfiring effects already when designing a technical solution, when suggesting industry or legal regulation, and in the planning of educational measures.
Recommendations
Solutions should be based on simultaneous considerations of technical, educational, and regulatory approaches, as well as incentives, including social ones, across the entire research infrastructure. Paying attention to how these approaches and incentives relate to each other can help identify points and mechanisms for disruption. Recognizing fraudulent academic papers must happen alongside understanding how they reach their audiences and what reasons there might be for some of these papers successfully “sticking around.” A possible way to mitigate some of the risks associated with GPT-fabricated scholarly texts finding their way into academic search engine results would be to provide filtering options for facets such as indexed journals, gray literature, peer-review, and similar on the interface of publicly available academic search engines. Furthermore, evaluation tools for indexed journals 3 Such as LiU Journal CheckUp, https://ep.liu.se/JournalCheckup/default.aspx?lang=eng . could be integrated into the graphical user interfaces and the crawlers of these academic search engines. To enable accountability, it is important that the index (database) of such a search engine is populated according to criteria that are transparent, open to scrutiny, and appropriate to the workings of science and other forms of academic research. Moreover, considering that Google Scholar has no real competitor, there is a strong case for establishing a freely accessible, non-specialized academic search engine that is not run for commercial reasons but for reasons of public interest. Such measures, together with educational initiatives aimed particularly at policymakers, science communicators, journalists, and other media workers, will be crucial to reducing the possibilities for and effects of malicious manipulation or evidence hacking. It is important not to present this as a technical problem that exists only because of AI text generators but to relate it to the wider concerns in which it is embedded. These range from a largely dysfunctional scholarly publishing system (Haider & Åström, 2017) and academia’s “publish or perish” paradigm to Google’s near-monopoly and ideological battles over the control of information and ultimately knowledge. Any intervention is likely to have systemic effects; these effects need to be considered and assessed in advance and, ideally, followed up on.
Our study focused on a selection of papers that were easily recognizable as fraudulent. We used this relatively small sample as a magnifying glass to examine, delineate, and understand a problem that goes beyond the scope of the sample itself, which however points towards larger concerns that require further investigation. The work of ongoing whistleblowing initiatives 4 Such as Academ-AI, https://www.academ-ai.info/ , and Retraction Watch, https://retractionwatch.com/papers-and-peer-reviews-with-evidence-of-chatgpt-writing/ . , recent media reports of journal closures (Subbaraman, 2024), or GPT-related changes in word use and writing style (Cabanac et al., 2021; Stokel-Walker, 2024) suggest that we only see the tip of the iceberg. There are already more sophisticated cases (Dadkhah et al., 2023) as well as cases involving fabricated images (Gu et al., 2022). Our analysis shows that questionable and potentially manipulative GPT-fabricated papers permeate the research infrastructure and are likely to become a widespread phenomenon. Our findings underline that the risk of fake scientific papers being used to maliciously manipulate evidence (see Dadkhah et al., 2017) must be taken seriously. Manipulation may involve undeclared automatic summaries of texts, inclusion in literature reviews, explicit scientific claims, or the concealment of errors in studies so that they are difficult to detect in peer review. However, the mere possibility of these things happening is a significant risk in its own right that can be strategically exploited and will have ramifications for trust in and perception of science. Society’s methods of evaluating sources and the foundations of media and information literacy are under threat and public trust in science is at risk of further erosion, with far-reaching consequences for society in dealing with information disorders. To address this multifaceted problem, we first need to understand why it exists and proliferates.
Finding 1: 139 GPT-fabricated, questionable papers were found and listed as regular results on the Google Scholar results page. Non-indexed journals dominate.
Most questionable papers we found were in non-indexed journals or were working papers, but we did also find some in established journals, publications, conferences, and repositories. We found a total of 139 papers with a suspected deceptive use of ChatGPT or similar LLM applications (see Table 1). Out of these, 19 were in indexed journals, 89 were in non-indexed journals, 19 were student papers found in university databases, and 12 were working papers (mostly in preprint databases). Table 1 divides these papers into categories. Health and environment papers made up around 34% (47) of the sample. Of these, 66% were present in non-indexed journals.
Indexed journals* | 5 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 19 |
Non-indexed journals | 18 | 18 | 13 | 40 | 89 |
Student papers | 4 | 3 | 1 | 11 | 19 |
Working papers | 5 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 12 |
Total | 32 | 27 | 20 | 60 | 139 |
Finding 2: GPT-fabricated, questionable papers are disseminated online, permeating the research infrastructure for scholarly communication, often in multiple copies. Applied topics with practical implications dominate.
The 20 papers concerning health-related issues are distributed across 20 unique domains, accounting for 46 URLs. The 27 papers dealing with environmental issues can be found across 26 unique domains, accounting for 56 URLs. Most of the identified papers exist in multiple copies and have already spread to several archives, repositories, and social media. It would be difficult, or impossible, to remove them from the scientific record.
As apparent from Table 2, GPT-fabricated, questionable papers are seeping into most parts of the online research infrastructure for scholarly communication. Platforms on which identified papers have appeared include ResearchGate, ORCiD, Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology (JPTCP), Easychair, Frontiers, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineer (IEEE), and X/Twitter. Thus, even if they are retracted from their original source, it will prove very difficult to track, remove, or even just mark them up on other platforms. Moreover, unless regulated, Google Scholar will enable their continued and most likely unlabeled discoverability.
Environment | researchgate.net (13) | orcid.org (4) | easychair.org (3) | ijope.com* (3) | publikasiindonesia.id (3) |
Health | researchgate.net (15) | ieee.org (4) | twitter.com (3) | jptcp.com** (2) | frontiersin.org (2) |
A word rain visualization (Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala, 2023), which combines word prominences through TF-IDF 5 Term frequency–inverse document frequency , a method for measuring the significance of a word in a document compared to its frequency across all documents in a collection. scores with semantic similarity of the full texts of our sample of GPT-generated articles that fall into the “Environment” and “Health” categories, reflects the two categories in question. However, as can be seen in Figure 1, it also reveals overlap and sub-areas. The y-axis shows word prominences through word positions and font sizes, while the x-axis indicates semantic similarity. In addition to a certain amount of overlap, this reveals sub-areas, which are best described as two distinct events within the word rain. The event on the left bundles terms related to the development and management of health and healthcare with “challenges,” “impact,” and “potential of artificial intelligence”emerging as semantically related terms. Terms related to research infrastructures, environmental, epistemic, and technological concepts are arranged further down in the same event (e.g., “system,” “climate,” “understanding,” “knowledge,” “learning,” “education,” “sustainable”). A second distinct event further to the right bundles terms associated with fish farming and aquatic medicinal plants, highlighting the presence of an aquaculture cluster. Here, the prominence of groups of terms such as “used,” “model,” “-based,” and “traditional” suggests the presence of applied research on these topics. The two events making up the word rain visualization, are linked by a less dominant but overlapping cluster of terms related to “energy” and “water.”
The bar chart of the terms in the paper subset (see Figure 2) complements the word rain visualization by depicting the most prominent terms in the full texts along the y-axis. Here, word prominences across health and environment papers are arranged descendingly, where values outside parentheses are TF-IDF values (relative frequencies) and values inside parentheses are raw term frequencies (absolute frequencies).
Finding 3: Google Scholar presents results from quality-controlled and non-controlled citation databases on the same interface, providing unfiltered access to GPT-fabricated questionable papers.
Google Scholar’s central position in the publicly accessible scholarly communication infrastructure, as well as its lack of standards, transparency, and accountability in terms of inclusion criteria, has potentially serious implications for public trust in science. This is likely to exacerbate the already-known potential to exploit Google Scholar for evidence hacking (Tripodi et al., 2023) and will have implications for any attempts to retract or remove fraudulent papers from their original publication venues. Any solution must consider the entirety of the research infrastructure for scholarly communication and the interplay of different actors, interests, and incentives.
We searched and scraped Google Scholar using the Python library Scholarly (Cholewiak et al., 2023) for papers that included specific phrases known to be common responses from ChatGPT and similar applications with the same underlying model (GPT3.5 or GPT4): “as of my last knowledge update” and/or “I don’t have access to real-time data” (see Appendix A). This facilitated the identification of papers that likely used generative AI to produce text, resulting in 227 retrieved papers. The papers’ bibliographic information was automatically added to a spreadsheet and downloaded into Zotero. 6 An open-source reference manager, https://zotero.org .
We employed multiple coding (Barbour, 2001) to classify the papers based on their content. First, we jointly assessed whether the paper was suspected of fraudulent use of ChatGPT (or similar) based on how the text was integrated into the papers and whether the paper was presented as original research output or the AI tool’s role was acknowledged. Second, in analyzing the content of the papers, we continued the multiple coding by classifying the fraudulent papers into four categories identified during an initial round of analysis—health, environment, computing, and others—and then determining which subjects were most affected by this issue (see Table 1). Out of the 227 retrieved papers, 88 papers were written with legitimate and/or declared use of GPTs (i.e., false positives, which were excluded from further analysis), and 139 papers were written with undeclared and/or fraudulent use (i.e., true positives, which were included in further analysis). The multiple coding was conducted jointly by all authors of the present article, who collaboratively coded and cross-checked each other’s interpretation of the data simultaneously in a shared spreadsheet file. This was done to single out coding discrepancies and settle coding disagreements, which in turn ensured methodological thoroughness and analytical consensus (see Barbour, 2001). Redoing the category coding later based on our established coding schedule, we achieved an intercoder reliability (Cohen’s kappa) of 0.806 after eradicating obvious differences.
The ranking algorithm of Google Scholar prioritizes highly cited and older publications (Martín-Martín et al., 2016). Therefore, the position of the articles on the search engine results pages was not particularly informative, considering the relatively small number of results in combination with the recency of the publications. Only the query “as of my last knowledge update” had more than two search engine result pages. On those, questionable articles with undeclared use of GPTs were evenly distributed across all result pages (min: 4, max: 9, mode: 8), with the proportion of undeclared use being slightly higher on average on later search result pages.
To understand how the papers making fraudulent use of generative AI were disseminated online, we programmatically searched for the paper titles (with exact string matching) in Google Search from our local IP address (see Appendix B) using the googlesearch – python library(Vikramaditya, 2020). We manually verified each search result to filter out false positives—results that were not related to the paper—and then compiled the most prominent URLs by field. This enabled the identification of other platforms through which the papers had been spread. We did not, however, investigate whether copies had spread into SciHub or other shadow libraries, or if they were referenced in Wikipedia.
We used descriptive statistics to count the prevalence of the number of GPT-fabricated papers across topics and venues and top domains by subject. The pandas software library for the Python programming language (The pandas development team, 2024) was used for this part of the analysis. Based on the multiple coding, paper occurrences were counted in relation to their categories, divided into indexed journals, non-indexed journals, student papers, and working papers. The schemes, subdomains, and subdirectories of the URL strings were filtered out while top-level domains and second-level domains were kept, which led to normalizing domain names. This, in turn, allowed the counting of domain frequencies in the environment and health categories. To distinguish word prominences and meanings in the environment and health-related GPT-fabricated questionable papers, a semantically-aware word cloud visualization was produced through the use of a word rain (Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala, 2023) for full-text versions of the papers. Font size and y-axis positions indicate word prominences through TF-IDF scores for the environment and health papers (also visualized in a separate bar chart with raw term frequencies in parentheses), and words are positioned along the x-axis to reflect semantic similarity (Skeppstedt et al., 2024), with an English Word2vec skip gram model space (Fares et al., 2017). An English stop word list was used, along with a manually produced list including terms such as “https,” “volume,” or “years.”
Haider, J., Söderström, K. R., Ekström, B., & Rödl, M. (2024). GPT-fabricated scientific papers on Google Scholar: Key features, spread, and implications for preempting evidence manipulation. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review . https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-156
Antkare, I. (2020). Ike Antkare, his publications, and those of his disciples. In M. Biagioli & A. Lippman (Eds.), Gaming the metrics (pp. 177–200). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11087.003.0018
Barbour, R. S. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ , 322 (7294), 1115–1117. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115
Bom, H.-S. H. (2023). Exploring the opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT in academic writing: A roundtable discussion. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging , 57 (4), 165–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-023-00809-2
Cabanac, G., & Labbé, C. (2021). Prevalence of nonsensical algorithmically generated papers in the scientific literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , 72 (12), 1461–1476. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24495
Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., & Magazinov, A. (2021). Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science. Evidence of critical issues affecting established journals . arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.06751
Carrion, M. L. (2018). “You need to do your research”: Vaccines, contestable science, and maternal epistemology. Public Understanding of Science , 27 (3), 310–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728024
Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala (2023). CDHUppsala/word-rain [Computer software]. https://github.com/CDHUppsala/word-rain
Chinn, S., & Hasell, A. (2023). Support for “doing your own research” is associated with COVID-19 misperceptions and scientific mistrust. Harvard Kennedy School (HSK) Misinformation Review, 4 (3). https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-117
Cholewiak, S. A., Ipeirotis, P., Silva, V., & Kannawadi, A. (2023). SCHOLARLY: Simple access to Google Scholar authors and citation using Python (1.5.0) [Computer software]. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5764801
Dadkhah, M., Lagzian, M., & Borchardt, G. (2017). Questionable papers in citation databases as an issue for literature review. Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling , 11 (2), 181–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12079-016-0370-6
Dadkhah, M., Oermann, M. H., Hegedüs, M., Raman, R., & Dávid, L. D. (2023). Detection of fake papers in the era of artificial intelligence. Diagnosis , 10 (4), 390–397. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2023-0090
DeGeurin, M. (2024, March 19). AI-generated nonsense is leaking into scientific journals. Popular Science. https://www.popsci.com/technology/ai-generated-text-scientific-journals/
Dunlap, R. E., & Brulle, R. J. (2020). Sources and amplifiers of climate change denial. In D.C. Holmes & L. M. Richardson (Eds.), Research handbook on communicating climate change (pp. 49–61). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789900408.00013
Fares, M., Kutuzov, A., Oepen, S., & Velldal, E. (2017). Word vectors, reuse, and replicability: Towards a community repository of large-text resources. In J. Tiedemann & N. Tahmasebi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 271–276). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/W17-0237
Google Scholar Help. (n.d.). Inclusion guidelines for webmasters . https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html
Gu, J., Wang, X., Li, C., Zhao, J., Fu, W., Liang, G., & Qiu, J. (2022). AI-enabled image fraud in scientific publications. Patterns , 3 (7), 100511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2022.100511
Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods , 11 (2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
Haider, J., & Åström, F. (2017). Dimensions of trust in scholarly communication: Problematizing peer review in the aftermath of John Bohannon’s “Sting” in science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , 68 (2), 450–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23669
Huang, J., & Tan, M. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in scientific communication: Writing better scientific review articles. American Journal of Cancer Research , 13 (4), 1148–1154. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10164801/
Jones, N. (2024). How journals are fighting back against a wave of questionable images. Nature , 626 (8000), 697–698. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00372-6
Kitamura, F. C. (2023). ChatGPT is shaping the future of medical writing but still requires human judgment. Radiology , 307 (2), e230171. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.230171
Littell, J. H., Abel, K. M., Biggs, M. A., Blum, R. W., Foster, D. G., Haddad, L. B., Major, B., Munk-Olsen, T., Polis, C. B., Robinson, G. E., Rocca, C. H., Russo, N. F., Steinberg, J. R., Stewart, D. E., Stotland, N. L., Upadhyay, U. D., & Ditzhuijzen, J. van. (2024). Correcting the scientific record on abortion and mental health outcomes. BMJ , 384 , e076518. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2023-076518
Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence-written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74 (5), 570–581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24750
Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllón, J. M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2016). Back to the past: On the shoulders of an academic search engine giant. Scientometrics , 107 , 1477–1487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1917-2
Martín-Martín, A., Thelwall, M., Orduna-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2021). Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: A multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations. Scientometrics , 126 (1), 871–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03690-4
Simon, F. M., Altay, S., & Mercier, H. (2023). Misinformation reloaded? Fears about the impact of generative AI on misinformation are overblown. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review, 4 (5). https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-127
Skeppstedt, M., Ahltorp, M., Kucher, K., & Lindström, M. (2024). From word clouds to Word Rain: Revisiting the classic word cloud to visualize climate change texts. Information Visualization , 23 (3), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/14738716241236188
Swedish Research Council. (2017). Good research practice. Vetenskapsrådet.
Stokel-Walker, C. (2024, May 1.). AI Chatbots Have Thoroughly Infiltrated Scientific Publishing . Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/chatbots-have-thoroughly-infiltrated-scientific-publishing/
Subbaraman, N. (2024, May 14). Flood of fake science forces multiple journal closures: Wiley to shutter 19 more journals, some tainted by fraud. The Wall Street Journal . https://www.wsj.com/science/academic-studies-research-paper-mills-journals-publishing-f5a3d4bc
The pandas development team. (2024). pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas (v2.2.2) [Computer software]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10957263
Thorp, H. H. (2023). ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science , 379 (6630), 313–313. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879
Tripodi, F. B., Garcia, L. C., & Marwick, A. E. (2023). ‘Do your own research’: Affordance activation and disinformation spread. Information, Communication & Society , 27 (6), 1212–1228. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2023.2245869
Vikramaditya, N. (2020). Nv7-GitHub/googlesearch [Computer software]. https://github.com/Nv7-GitHub/googlesearch
This research has been supported by Mistra, the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research, through the research program Mistra Environmental Communication (Haider, Ekström, Rödl) and the Marcus and Amalia Wallenberg Foundation [2020.0004] (Söderström).
The authors declare no competing interests.
The research described in this article was carried out under Swedish legislation. According to the relevant EU and Swedish legislation (2003:460) on the ethical review of research involving humans (“Ethical Review Act”), the research reported on here is not subject to authorization by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (“etikprövningsmyndigheten”) (SRC, 2017).
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original author and source are properly credited.
All data needed to replicate this study are available at the Harvard Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/WUVD8X
The authors wish to thank two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on the article manuscript as well as the editorial group of Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review for their thoughtful feedback and input.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
A purpose statement clearly defines the objective of your qualitative or quantitative research. Learn how to create one through unique and real-world examples.
What Is Research Report? Definition, Contents, ...
The purpose of research can vary depending on the field of study, the research question, and the intended audience. In general, research can be used to: Generate new knowledge and theories. Test existing theories or hypotheses. Identify trends or patterns. Gather information for decision-making. Evaluate the effectiveness of programs, policies ...
A research report is a well-crafted document that outlines the processes, data, and findings of a systematic investigation. It is an important document that serves as a first-hand account of the research process, and it is typically considered an objective and accurate source of information.
What is Research? - Purpose of Research
Research report guide: Definition, types, and tips
Research Reports: Definition and How to Write Them
The purpose of a research paper is to present the results of a study or investigation in a clear, concise, and structured manner. Research papers are written to communicate new knowledge, ideas, or findings to a specific audience, such as researchers, scholars, practitioners, or policymakers. The primary purposes of a research paper are:
Writing a Research Report in American Psychological ...
When reporting the methods used in a sample -based study, the usual convention is to. discuss the following topics in the order shown: Chapter 13 Writing a Research Report 8. • Sample (number in ...
The purpose of a research report is to communicate the findings of research studies to a wider audience. The report should be clear, concise, and well-organised so that readers can easily understand the information presented. Many research reports are formally structured, with headings and — for PDFs — page numbers, ...
A research report is one big argument about how and why you came up with your conclusions. To make it a convincing argument, a typical guiding structure has developed. ... It might be a good idea to read through the following chapters about writing a research report, look at the purpose of each chapter, and then come back to this section.
Use the section headings (outlined above) to assist with your rough plan. Write a thesis statement that clarifies the overall purpose of your report. Jot down anything you already know about the topic in the relevant sections. 3 Do the Research. Steps 1 and 2 will guide your research for this report.
How to Write an Effective Research REport
Report Writing.pdf
Research Objectives | Definition & Examples
Research results can be presented in a variety of ways, but one of the most popular— and effective—presentation forms is the research paper. A research paper presents an original thesis, or purpose statement, about a topic and develops that thesis with information gathered from a variety of sources.
The purpose of the research report may be discussed under the following heads: 1. Transmission of Knowledge: The knowledge that has been obtained on the basis of research need transmission for proper utilization of the resources invested. Because of that reason, it is always advisable to prepare to report in a written manner so that it can also ...
Writing a Field Report - Organizing Your Social Sciences ...
A research report serves the purpose of presenting and explaining the findings of a research study. It is a means of communicating the methodology, results, and conclusions of the research to the scientific community and other interested parties. The report provides a detailed account of the research process, including the issues addressed, the data collected, and the analysis conducted.
The purpose of your lab report is to share the importance, analysis, and scope of your research. Your audience is your professor, instructor, or peers. While you probably won't be submitting your report to a journal for peer-review, it is still a good idea to adhere to the conventions and guidelines specified by your instructor, because writing ...
Purpose: Standards for reporting exist for many types of quantitative research, but currently none exist for the broad spectrum of qualitative research. The purpose of the present study was to formulate and define standards for reporting qualitative research while preserving the requisite flexibility to accommodate various paradigms, approaches, and methods.
With this purpose, it will paer conducted the qualitative and quantitative recommendation format in research paper, sample methodology section of a research paper allows gaining the most relevant results about the relations between the alcohol use and the school performance. The PMC legacy view paaper also be available for a limited time.
Professors' research also makes its way into the classroom. "The research they're doing outside of the classroom informs and strengthens their approach within it," says Babson President Stephen Spinelli Jr. MBA'92, PhD. "That value proposition enhances our academic rigor and ensures Babson remains at the forefront of emerging trends ...
The Research Capstone Advisor is akin to a kind but experienced professor or mentor, specializing in computer science research papers. It adopts a casual, supportive tone, making students feel at ease while navigating the complexities of academic writing. This GPT focuses on key sections of research papers, providing clear and concise feedback.
Deloitte US | Audit, Consulting, Advisory, and Tax Services
As part of the Child Care and Early Education Policy and Research Analysis (CCEEPRA) project with the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE), Child Trends hosted a virtual convening in April 2023 with researchers from nine OPRE-funded research projects. The purpose of the convening was to learn about the implications of researchers ...
With the emerging forces of online and digital products, scholars keenly captured digital literacy and have new research dimensions. The purpose of this study is to present a bibliometric analysis of digital literacy using CiteSpace and to explore the categories, themes and research evolution in digital literacy. A total of 9042 bibliographic records were retrieved from the WoS Core Collection ...
Students' problems in learning English often stem from a lack of exposure to the language, insufficient practice opportunities, and challenges with grammar and vocabulary, which collectively hinder their overall proficiency and confidence. The purpose of this study is to measure students' ability in mastering English. The method used in this study is a descriptive quantitative approach ...
Academic journals, archives, and repositories are seeing an increasing number of questionable research papers clearly produced using generative AI. They are often created with widely available, general-purpose AI applications, most likely ChatGPT, and mimic scientific writing. Google Scholar easily locates and lists these questionable papers alongside reputable, quality-controlled research.