research planning and scientific writing

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Prev Chronic Dis

Successful Scientific Writing and Publishing: A Step-by-Step Approach

John k. iskander.

1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia

Sara Beth Wolicki

2 Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health, Washington, District of Columbia

Rebecca T. Leeb

Paul z. siegel.

Scientific writing and publication are essential to advancing knowledge and practice in public health, but prospective authors face substantial challenges. Authors can overcome barriers, such as lack of understanding about scientific writing and the publishing process, with training and resources. The objective of this article is to provide guidance and practical recommendations to help both inexperienced and experienced authors working in public health settings to more efficiently publish the results of their work in the peer-reviewed literature. We include an overview of basic scientific writing principles, a detailed description of the sections of an original research article, and practical recommendations for selecting a journal and responding to peer review comments. The overall approach and strategies presented are intended to contribute to individual career development while also increasing the external validity of published literature and promoting quality public health science.

Introduction

Publishing in the peer-reviewed literature is essential to advancing science and its translation to practice in public health ( 1 , 2 ). The public health workforce is diverse and practices in a variety of settings ( 3 ). For some public health professionals, writing and publishing the results of their work is a requirement. Others, such as program managers, policy makers, or health educators, may see publishing as being outside the scope of their responsibilities ( 4 ).

Disseminating new knowledge via writing and publishing is vital both to authors and to the field of public health ( 5 ). On an individual level, publishing is associated with professional development and career advancement ( 6 ). Publications share new research, results, and methods in a trusted format and advance scientific knowledge and practice ( 1 , 7 ). As more public health professionals are empowered to publish, the science and practice of public health will advance ( 1 ).

Unfortunately, prospective authors face barriers to publishing their work, including navigating the process of scientific writing and publishing, which can be time-consuming and cumbersome. Often, public health professionals lack both training opportunities and understanding of the process ( 8 ). To address these barriers and encourage public health professionals to publish their findings, the senior author (P.Z.S.) and others developed Successful Scientific Writing (SSW), a course about scientific writing and publishing. Over the past 30 years, this course has been taught to thousands of public health professionals, as well as hundreds of students at multiple graduate schools of public health. An unpublished longitudinal survey of course participants indicated that two-thirds agreed that SSW had helped them to publish a scientific manuscript or have a conference abstract accepted. The course content has been translated into this manuscript. The objective of this article is to provide prospective authors with the tools needed to write original research articles of high quality that have a good chance of being published.

Basic Recommendations for Scientific Writing

Prospective authors need to know and tailor their writing to the audience. When writing for scientific journals, 4 fundamental recommendations are: clearly stating the usefulness of the study, formulating a key message, limiting unnecessary words, and using strategic sentence structure.

To demonstrate usefulness, focus on how the study addresses a meaningful gap in current knowledge or understanding. What critical piece of information does the study provide that will help solve an important public health problem? For example, if a particular group of people is at higher risk for a specific condition, but the magnitude of that risk is unknown, a study to quantify the risk could be important for measuring the population’s burden of disease.

Scientific articles should have a clear and concise take-home message. Typically, this is expressed in 1 to 2 sentences that summarize the main point of the paper. This message can be used to focus the presentation of background information, results, and discussion of findings. As an early step in the drafting of an article, we recommend writing out the take-home message and sharing it with co-authors for their review and comment. Authors who know their key point are better able to keep their writing within the scope of the article and present information more succinctly. Once an initial draft of the manuscript is complete, the take-home message can be used to review the content and remove needless words, sentences, or paragraphs.

Concise writing improves the clarity of an article. Including additional words or clauses can divert from the main message and confuse the reader. Additionally, journal articles are typically limited by word count. The most important words and phrases to eliminate are those that do not add meaning, or are duplicative. Often, cutting adjectives or parenthetical statements results in a more concise paper that is also easier to read.

Sentence structure strongly influences the readability and comprehension of journal articles. Twenty to 25 words is a reasonable range for maximum sentence length. Limit the number of clauses per sentence, and place the most important or relevant clause at the end of the sentence ( 9 ). Consider the sentences:

• By using these tips and tricks, an author may write and publish an additional 2 articles a year.
• An author may write and publish an additional 2 articles a year by using these tips and tricks.

The focus of the first sentence is on the impact of using the tips and tricks, that is, 2 more articles published per year. In contrast, the second sentence focuses on the tips and tricks themselves.

Authors should use the active voice whenever possible. Consider the following example:

• Active voice: Authors who use the active voice write more clearly.
• Passive voice: Clarity of writing is promoted by the use of the active voice.

The active voice specifies who is doing the action described in the sentence. Using the active voice improves clarity and understanding, and generally uses fewer words. Scientific writing includes both active and passive voice, but authors should be intentional with their use of either one.

Sections of an Original Research Article

Original research articles make up most of the peer-reviewed literature ( 10 ), follow a standardized format, and are the focus of this article. The 4 main sections are the introduction, methods, results, and discussion, sometimes referred to by the initialism, IMRAD. These 4 sections are referred to as the body of an article. Two additional components of all peer-reviewed articles are the title and the abstract. Each section’s purpose and key components, along with specific recommendations for writing each section, are listed below.

Title. The purpose of a title is twofold: to provide an accurate and informative summary and to attract the target audience. Both prospective readers and database search engines use the title to screen articles for relevance ( 2 ). All titles should clearly state the topic being studied. The topic includes the who, what, when, and where of the study. Along with the topic, select 1 or 2 of the following items to include within the title: methods, results, conclusions, or named data set or study. The items chosen should emphasize what is new and useful about the study. Some sources recommend limiting the title to less than 150 characters ( 2 ). Articles with shorter titles are more frequently cited than articles with longer titles ( 11 ). Several title options are possible for the same study ( Figure ).

Two examples of title options for a single study.

Abstract . The abstract serves 2 key functions. Journals may screen articles for potential publication by using the abstract alone ( 12 ), and readers may use the abstract to decide whether to read further. Therefore, it is critical to produce an accurate and clear abstract that highlights the major purpose of the study, basic procedures, main findings, and principal conclusions ( 12 ). Most abstracts have a word limit and can be either structured following IMRAD, or unstructured. The abstract needs to stand alone from the article and tell the most important parts of the scientific story up front.

Introduction . The purpose of the introduction is to explain how the study sought to create knowledge that is new and useful. The introduction section may often require only 3 paragraphs. First, describe the scope, nature, or magnitude of the problem being addressed. Next, clearly articulate why better understanding this problem is useful, including what is currently known and the limitations of relevant previous studies. Finally, explain what the present study adds to the knowledge base. Explicitly state whether data were collected in a unique way or obtained from a previously unstudied data set or population. Presenting both the usefulness and novelty of the approach taken will prepare the reader for the remaining sections of the article.

Methods . The methods section provides the information necessary to allow others, given the same data, to recreate the analysis. It describes exactly how data relevant to the study purpose were collected, organized, and analyzed. The methods section describes the process of conducting the study — from how the sample was selected to which statistical methods were used to analyze the data. Authors should clearly name, define, and describe each study variable. Some journals allow detailed methods to be included in an appendix or supplementary document. If the analysis involves a commonly used public health data set, such as the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System ( 13 ), general aspects of the data set can be provided to readers by using references. Because what was done is typically more important than who did it, use of the passive voice is often appropriate when describing methods. For example, “The study was a group randomized, controlled trial. A coin was tossed to select an intervention group and a control group.”

Results . The results section describes the main outcomes of the study or analysis but does not interpret the findings or place them in the context of previous research. It is important that the results be logically organized. Suggested organization strategies include presenting results pertaining to the entire population first, and then subgroup analyses, or presenting results according to increasing complexity of analysis, starting with demographic results before proceeding to univariate and multivariate analyses. Authors wishing to draw special attention to novel or unexpected results can present them first.

One strategy for writing the results section is to start by first drafting the figures and tables. Figures, which typically show trends or relationships, and tables, which show specific data points, should each support a main outcome of the study. Identify the figures and tables that best describe the findings and relate to the study’s purpose, and then develop 1 to 2 sentences summarizing each one. Data not relevant to the study purpose may be excluded, summarized briefly in the text, or included in supplemental data sets. When finalizing figures, ensure that axes are labeled and that readers can understand figures without having to refer to accompanying text.

Discussion . In the discussion section, authors interpret the results of their study within the context of both the related literature and the specific scientific gap the study was intended to fill. The discussion does not introduce results that were not presented in the results section. One way authors can focus their discussion is to limit this section to 4 paragraphs: start by reinforcing the study’s take-home message(s), contextualize key results within the relevant literature, state the study limitations, and lastly, make recommendations for further research or policy and practice changes. Authors can support assertions made in the discussion with either their own findings or by referencing related research. By interpreting their own study results and comparing them to others in the literature, authors can emphasize findings that are unique, useful, and relevant. Present study limitations clearly and without apology. Finally, state the implications of the study and provide recommendations or next steps, for example, further research into remaining gaps or changes to practice or policy. Statements or recommendations regarding policy may use the passive voice, especially in instances where the action to be taken is more important than who will implement the action.

Beginning the Writing Process

The process of writing a scientific article occurs before, during, and after conducting the study or analyses. Conducting a literature review is crucial to confirm the existence of the evidence gap that the planned analysis seeks to fill. Because literature searches are often part of applying for research funding or developing a study protocol, the citations used in the grant application or study proposal can also be used in subsequent manuscripts. Full-text databases such as PubMed Central ( 14 ), NIH RePORT ( 15 ), and CDC Stacks ( 16 ) can be useful when performing literature reviews. Authors should familiarize themselves with databases that are accessible through their institution and any assistance that may be available from reference librarians or interlibrary loan systems. Using citation management software is one way to establish and maintain a working reference list. Authors should clearly understand the distinction between primary and secondary references, and ensure that they are knowledgeable about the content of any primary or secondary reference that they cite.

Review of the literature may continue while organizing the material and writing begins. One way to organize material is to create an outline for the paper. Another way is to begin drafting small sections of the article such as the introduction. Starting a preliminary draft forces authors to establish the scope of their analysis and clearly articulate what is new and novel about the study. Furthermore, using information from the study protocol or proposal allows authors to draft the methods and part of the results sections while the study is in progress. Planning potential data comparisons or drafting “table shells” will help to ensure that the study team has collected all the necessary data. Drafting these preliminary sections early during the writing process and seeking feedback from co-authors and colleagues may help authors avoid potential pitfalls, including misunderstandings about study objectives.

The next step is to conduct the study or analyses and use the resulting data to fill in the draft table shells. The initial results will most likely require secondary analyses, that is, exploring the data in ways in addition to those originally planned. Authors should ensure that they regularly update their methods section to describe all changes to data analysis.

After completing table shells, authors should summarize the key finding of each table or figure in a sentence or two. Presenting preliminary results at meetings, conferences, and internal seminars is an established way to solicit feedback. Authors should pay close attention to questions asked by the audience, treating them as an informal opportunity for peer review. On the basis of the questions and feedback received, authors can incorporate revisions and improvements into subsequent drafts of the manuscript.

The relevant literature should be revisited periodically while writing to ensure knowledge of the most recent publications about the manuscript topic. Authors should focus on content and key message during the process of writing the first draft and should not spend too much time on issues of grammar or style. Drafts, or portions of drafts, should be shared frequently with trusted colleagues. Their recommendations should be reviewed and incorporated when they will improve the manuscript’s overall clarity.

For most authors, revising drafts of the manuscript will be the most time-consuming task involved in writing a paper. By regularly checking in with coauthors and colleagues, authors can adopt a systematic approach to rewriting. When the author has completed a draft of the manuscript, he or she should revisit the key take-home message to ensure that it still matches the final data and analysis. At this point, final comments and approval of the manuscript by coauthors can be sought.

Authors should then seek to identify journals most likely to be interested in considering the study for publication. Initial questions to consider when selecting a journal include:

• Which audience is most interested in the paper’s message?
• Would clinicians, public health practitioners, policy makers, scientists, or a broader audience find this useful in their field or practice?
• Do colleagues have prior experience submitting a manuscript to this journal?
• Is the journal indexed and peer-reviewed?
• Is the journal subscription or open-access and are there any processing fees?
• How competitive is the journal?

Authors should seek to balance the desire to be published in a top-tier journal (eg, Journal of the American Medical Association, BMJ, or Lancet) against the statistical likelihood of rejection. Submitting the paper initially to a journal more focused on the paper’s target audience may result in a greater chance of acceptance, as well as more timely dissemination of findings that can be translated into practice. Most of the 50 to 75 manuscripts published each week by authors from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are published in specialty and subspecialty journals, rather than in top-tier journals ( 17 ).

The target journal’s website will include author guidelines, which will contain specific information about format requirements (eg, font, line spacing, section order, reference style and limit, table and figure formatting), authorship criteria, article types, and word limits for articles and abstracts.

We recommend returning to the previously drafted abstract and ensuring that it complies with the journal’s format and word limit. Authors should also verify that any changes made to the methods or results sections during the article’s drafting are reflected in the final version of the abstract. The abstract should not be written hurriedly just before submitting the manuscript; it is often apparent to editors and reviewers when this has happened. A cover letter to accompany the submission should be drafted; new and useful findings and the key message should be included.

Before submitting the manuscript and cover letter, authors should perform a final check to ensure that their paper complies with all journal requirements. Journals may elect to reject certain submissions on the basis of review of the abstract, or may send them to peer reviewers (typically 2 or 3) for consultation. Occasionally, on the basis of peer reviews, the journal will request only minor changes before accepting the paper for publication. Much more frequently, authors will receive a request to revise and resubmit their manuscript, taking into account peer review comments. Authors should recognize that while revise-and-resubmit requests may state that the manuscript is not acceptable in its current form, this does not constitute a rejection of the article. Authors have several options in responding to peer review comments:

• Performing additional analyses and updating the article appropriately
• Declining to perform additional analyses, but providing an explanation (eg, because the requested analysis goes beyond the scope of the article)
• Providing updated references
• Acknowledging reviewer comments that are simply comments without making changes

In addition to submitting a revised manuscript, authors should include a cover letter in which they list peer reviewer comments, along with the revisions they have made to the manuscript and their reply to the comment. The tone of such letters should be thankful and polite, but authors should make clear areas of disagreement with peer reviewers, and explain why they disagree. During the peer review process, authors should continue to consult with colleagues, especially ones who have more experience with the specific journal or with the peer review process.

There is no secret to successful scientific writing and publishing. By adopting a systematic approach and by regularly seeking feedback from trusted colleagues throughout the study, writing, and article submission process, authors can increase their likelihood of not only publishing original research articles of high quality but also becoming more scientifically productive overall.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge PCD ’s former Associate Editor, Richard A. Goodman, MD, MPH, who, while serving as Editor in Chief of CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Series, initiated a curriculum on scientific writing for training CDC’s Epidemic Intelligence Service Officers and other CDC public health professionals, and with whom the senior author of this article (P.Z.S.) collaborated in expanding training methods and contents, some of which are contained in this article. The authors acknowledge Juan Carlos Zevallos, MD, for his thoughtful critique and careful editing of previous Successful Scientific Writing materials. We also thank Shira Eisenberg for editorial assistance with the manuscript. This publication was supported by the Cooperative Agreement no. 1U360E000002 from CDC and the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. The findings and conclusions of this article do not necessarily represent the official views of CDC or the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. Names of journals and citation databases are provided for identification purposes only and do not constitute any endorsement by CDC.

The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions.

Suggested citation for this article: Iskander JK, Wolicki SB, Leeb RT, Siegel PZ. Successful Scientific Writing and Publishing: A Step-by-Step Approach. Prev Chronic Dis 2018;15:180085. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd15.180085 .

How to write a research plan: Step-by-step guide

Last updated

30 January 2024

Reviewed by

Today’s businesses and institutions rely on data and analytics to inform their product and service decisions. These metrics influence how organizations stay competitive and inspire innovation. However, gathering data and insights requires carefully constructed research, and every research project needs a roadmap. This is where a research plan comes into play.

There’s general research planning; then there’s an official, well-executed research plan. Whatever data-driven research project you’re gearing up for, the research plan will be your framework for execution. The plan should also be detailed and thorough, with a diligent set of criteria to formulate your research efforts. Not including these key elements in your plan can be just as harmful as having no plan at all.

Read this step-by-step guide for writing a detailed research plan that can apply to any project, whether it’s scientific, educational, or business-related.

• What is a research plan?

A research plan is a documented overview of a project in its entirety, from end to end. It details the research efforts, participants, and methods needed, along with any anticipated results. It also outlines the project’s goals and mission, creating layers of steps to achieve those goals within a specified timeline.

Without a research plan, you and your team are flying blind, potentially wasting time and resources to pursue research without structured guidance.

The principal investigator, or PI, is responsible for facilitating the research oversight. They will create the research plan and inform team members and stakeholders of every detail relating to the project. The PI will also use the research plan to inform decision-making throughout the project.

• Why do you need a research plan?

Create a research plan before starting any official research to maximize every effort in pursuing and collecting the research data. Crucially, the plan will model the activities needed at each phase of the research project.

Like any roadmap, a research plan serves as a valuable tool providing direction for those involved in the project—both internally and externally. It will keep you and your immediate team organized and task-focused while also providing necessary definitions and timelines so you can execute your project initiatives with full understanding and transparency.

External stakeholders appreciate a working research plan because it’s a great communication tool, documenting progress and changing dynamics as they arise. Any participants of your planned research sessions will be informed about the purpose of your study, while the exercises will be based on the key messaging outlined in the official plan.

Here are some of the benefits of creating a research plan document for every project:

Project organization and structure

Well-informed participants

All stakeholders and teams align in support of the project

Clearly defined project definitions and purposes

Distractions are eliminated, prioritizing task focus

Timely management of individual task schedules and roles

Costly reworks are avoided

• What should a research plan include?

The different aspects of your research plan will depend on the nature of the project. However, most official research plan documents will include the core elements below. Each aims to define the problem statement, devising an official plan for seeking a solution.

Specific project goals and individual objectives

Ideal strategies or methods for reaching those goals

Required resources

Descriptions of the target audience, sample sizes, demographics, and scopes

Key performance indicators (KPIs)

Project background

Research and testing support

Preliminary studies and progress reporting mechanisms

Cost estimates and change order processes

Depending on the research project’s size and scope, your research plan could be brief—perhaps only a few pages of documented plans. Alternatively, it could be a fully comprehensive report. Either way, it’s an essential first step in dictating your project’s facilitation in the most efficient and effective way.

• How to write a research plan for your project

When you start writing your research plan, aim to be detailed about each step, requirement, and idea. The more time you spend curating your research plan, the more precise your research execution efforts will be.

Account for every potential scenario, and be sure to address each and every aspect of the research.

Consider following this flow to develop a great research plan for your project:

Define your project’s purpose

Start by defining your project’s purpose. Identify what your project aims to accomplish and what you are researching. Remember to use clear language.

Thinking about the project’s purpose will help you set realistic goals and inform how you divide tasks and assign responsibilities. These individual tasks will be your stepping stones to reach your overarching goal.

Additionally, you’ll want to identify the specific problem, the usability metrics needed, and the intended solutions.

Know the following three things about your project’s purpose before you outline anything else:

What you’re doing

Why you’re doing it

What you expect from it

Identify individual objectives

With your overarching project objectives in place, you can identify any individual goals or steps needed to reach those objectives. Break them down into phases or steps. You can work backward from the project goal and identify every process required to facilitate it.

Be mindful to identify each unique task so that you can assign responsibilities to various team members. At this point in your research plan development, you’ll also want to assign priority to those smaller, more manageable steps and phases that require more immediate or dedicated attention.

Select research methods

Research methods might include any of the following:

User interviews: this is a qualitative research method where researchers engage with participants in one-on-one or group conversations. The aim is to gather insights into their experiences, preferences, and opinions to uncover patterns, trends, and data.

Field studies: this approach allows for a contextual understanding of behaviors, interactions, and processes in real-world settings. It involves the researcher immersing themselves in the field, conducting observations, interviews, or experiments to gather in-depth insights.

Card sorting: participants categorize information by sorting content cards into groups based on their perceived similarities. You might use this process to gain insights into participants’ mental models and preferences when navigating or organizing information on websites, apps, or other systems.

Focus groups: use organized discussions among select groups of participants to provide relevant views and experiences about a particular topic.

Diary studies: ask participants to record their experiences, thoughts, and activities in a diary over a specified period. This method provides a deeper understanding of user experiences, uncovers patterns, and identifies areas for improvement.

Five-second testing: participants are shown a design, such as a web page or interface, for just five seconds. They then answer questions about their initial impressions and recall, allowing you to evaluate the design’s effectiveness.

Surveys: get feedback from participant groups with structured surveys. You can use online forms, telephone interviews, or paper questionnaires to reveal trends, patterns, and correlations.

Tree testing: tree testing involves researching web assets through the lens of findability and navigability. Participants are given a textual representation of the site’s hierarchy (the “tree”) and asked to locate specific information or complete tasks by selecting paths.

Usability testing: ask participants to interact with a product, website, or application to evaluate its ease of use. This method enables you to uncover areas for improvement in digital key feature functionality by observing participants using the product.

Live website testing: research and collect analytics that outlines the design, usability, and performance efficiencies of a website in real time.

There are no limits to the number of research methods you could use within your project. Just make sure your research methods help you determine the following:

What do you plan to do with the research findings?

What decisions will this research inform? How can your stakeholders leverage the research data and results?

Recruit participants and allocate tasks

Next, identify the participants needed to complete the research and the resources required to complete the tasks. Different people will be proficient at different tasks, and having a task allocation plan will allow everything to run smoothly.

Prepare a thorough project summary

Every well-designed research plan will feature a project summary. This official summary will guide your research alongside its communications or messaging. You’ll use the summary while recruiting participants and during stakeholder meetings. It can also be useful when conducting field studies.

Ensure this summary includes all the elements of your research project. Separate the steps into an easily explainable piece of text that includes the following:

An introduction: the message you’ll deliver to participants about the interview, pre-planned questioning, and testing tasks.

Interview questions: prepare questions you intend to ask participants as part of your research study, guiding the sessions from start to finish.

An exit message: draft messaging your teams will use to conclude testing or survey sessions. These should include the next steps and express gratitude for the participant’s time.

Create a realistic timeline

While your project might already have a deadline or a results timeline in place, you’ll need to consider the time needed to execute it effectively.

Realistically outline the time needed to properly execute each supporting phase of research and implementation. And, as you evaluate the necessary schedules, be sure to include additional time for achieving each milestone in case any changes or unexpected delays arise.

For this part of your research plan, you might find it helpful to create visuals to ensure your research team and stakeholders fully understand the information.

Determine how to present your results

A research plan must also describe how you intend to present your results. Depending on the nature of your project and its goals, you might dedicate one team member (the PI) or assume responsibility for communicating the findings yourself.

In this part of the research plan, you’ll articulate how you’ll share the results. Detail any materials you’ll use, such as:

Presentations and slides

A project report booklet

A project findings pamphlet

Documents with key takeaways and statistics

Graphic visuals to support your findings

• Format your research plan

As you create your research plan, you can enjoy a little creative freedom. A plan can assume many forms, so format it how you see fit. Determine the best layout based on your specific project, intended communications, and the preferences of your teams and stakeholders.

Find format inspiration among the following layouts:

Written outlines

Narrative storytelling

Visual mapping

Graphic timelines

Remember, the research plan format you choose will be subject to change and adaptation as your research and findings unfold. However, your final format should ideally outline questions, problems, opportunities, and expectations.

• Research plan example

Imagine you’ve been tasked with finding out how to get more customers to order takeout from an online food delivery platform. The goal is to improve satisfaction and retain existing customers. You set out to discover why more people aren’t ordering and what it is they do want to order or experience. 

You identify the need for a research project that helps you understand what drives customer loyalty. But before you jump in and start calling past customers, you need to develop a research plan—the roadmap that provides focus, clarity, and realistic details to the project.

Here’s an example outline of a research plan you might put together:

Project title

Project members involved in the research plan

Purpose of the project (provide a summary of the research plan’s intent)

Objective 1 (provide a short description for each objective)

Objective 2

Objective 3

Proposed timeline

Audience (detail the group you want to research, such as customers or non-customers)

Budget (how much you think it might cost to do the research)

Risk factors/contingencies (any potential risk factors that may impact the project’s success)

Remember, your research plan doesn’t have to reinvent the wheel—it just needs to fit your project’s unique needs and aims.

Customizing a research plan template

Some companies offer research plan templates to help get you started. However, it may make more sense to develop your own customized plan template. Be sure to include the core elements of a great research plan with your template layout, including the following:

Introductions to participants and stakeholders

Background problems and needs statement

Significance, ethics, and purpose

Research methods, questions, and designs

Preliminary beliefs and expectations

Implications and intended outcomes

Realistic timelines for each phase

Conclusion and presentations

How many pages should a research plan be?

Generally, a research plan can vary in length between 500 to 1,500 words. This is roughly three pages of content. More substantial projects will be 2,000 to 3,500 words, taking up four to seven pages of planning documents.

What is the difference between a research plan and a research proposal?

A research plan is a roadmap to success for research teams. A research proposal, on the other hand, is a dissertation aimed at convincing or earning the support of others. Both are relevant in creating a guide to follow to complete a project goal.

What are the seven steps to developing a research plan?

While each research project is different, it’s best to follow these seven general steps to create your research plan:

Defining the problem

Identifying goals

Choosing research methods

Recruiting participants

Preparing the brief or summary

Establishing task timelines

Defining how you will present the findings

Get started today

Go from raw data to valuable insights with a flexible research platform

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 21 December 2023

Last updated: 16 December 2023

Last updated: 6 October 2023

Last updated: 25 November 2023

Last updated: 12 May 2023

Last updated: 15 February 2024

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 18 May 2023

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 10 April 2023

Last updated: 20 December 2023

Latest articles

Related topics, log in or sign up.

Get started for free

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

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

Welcome to the PLOS Writing Center

Your source for scientific writing & publishing essentials.

A collection of free, practical guides and hands-on resources for authors looking to improve their scientific publishing skillset.

ARTICLE-WRITING ESSENTIALS

Your title is the first thing anyone who reads your article is going to see, and for many it will be where they stop reading. Learn how to write a title that helps readers find your article, draws your audience in and sets the stage for your research!

The abstract is your chance to let your readers know what they can expect from your article. Learn how to write a clear, and concise abstract that will keep your audience reading.

A clear methods section impacts editorial evaluation and readers’ understanding, and is also the backbone of transparency and replicability. Learn what to include in your methods section, and how much detail is appropriate.

In many fields, a statistical analysis forms the heart of both the methods and results sections of a manuscript. Learn how to report statistical analyses, and what other context is important for publication success and future reproducibility.

The discussion section contains the results and outcomes of a study. An effective discussion informs readers what can be learned from your experiment and provides context for the results.

Ensuring your manuscript is well-written makes it easier for editors, reviewers and readers to understand your work. Avoiding language errors can help accelerate review and minimize delays in the publication of your research.

The PLOS Writing Toolbox

Delivered to your inbox every two weeks, the Writing Toolbox features practical advice and tools you can use to prepare a research manuscript for submission success and build your scientific writing skillset. 

Discover how to navigate the peer review and publishing process, beyond writing your article.

The path to publication can be unsettling when you’re unsure what’s happening with your paper. Learn about staple journal workflows to see the detailed steps required for ensuring a rigorous and ethical publication.

Reputable journals screen for ethics at submission—and inability to pass ethics checks is one of the most common reasons for rejection. Unfortunately, once a study has begun, it’s often too late to secure the requisite ethical reviews and clearances. Learn how to prepare for publication success by ensuring your study meets all ethical requirements before work begins.

From preregistration, to preprints, to publication—learn how and when to share your study.

How you store your data matters. Even after you publish your article, your data needs to be accessible and useable for the long term so that other researchers can continue building on your work. Good data management practices make your data discoverable and easy to use, promote a strong foundation for reproducibility and increase your likelihood of citations.

You’ve just spent months completing your study, writing up the results and submitting to your top-choice journal. Now the feedback is in and it’s time to revise. Set out a clear plan for your response to keep yourself on-track and ensure edits don’t fall through the cracks.

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

Are you actively preparing a submission for a PLOS journal? Select the relevant journal below for more detailed guidelines. 

Accelerating scientific and drug discovery in an AI-powered lab

In Gaurav Chopra’s lab, discovery starts with a conversation with an artificial intelligence (AI) agent manager that helps to plan, execute and analyze experiments. Researchers chat in natural language and make a query, perhaps asking to design a drug for a particular target or synthesize a specific molecule. The tool — an AI agent manager — identifies all the resources to fulfill the task and communicates with lower-level agents that represent an instrument in the lab; or domain- or task-specific knowledge; or analysis AI and constructs a workflow to address the query given the resources available in the lab.

The AI agent manager plans the workflow to execute on instruments and identifies the procedures that will be part of the experiment. At the individual agent level, the workflow includes scheduling the instrument with appropriate settings and commands needed for execution and even running specific computer code for operating the instrument.   

And then the work begins.

“The agent manager is like ChatGPT for the lab, and it works with the individual agents for each instrument or for domain-specific knowledge,” said Chopra, a Purdue associate professor of chemistry and (by courtesy) of computer science. “It’s a generalized, modular AI infrastructure that can do any task based on your objective. A lot of people are developing AI agents for one specific task. Our approach is task agnostic — I can swap out lab instruments or datasets and, if I do, I don’t have to change out the entire software infrastructure.”

Chopra is also a steering committee member for the Institute for Physical AI (IPAI) and core member of Regenstrief Center for Healthcare Engineering, and Purdue Institutes for Drug Discovery, Cancer Research and Integrative Neuroscience.

With the goal of accelerating scientific discovery, his lab has been developing the artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) infrastructure with the support of the National Institutes of Health National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS). In 2022, Chopra and a team used the AI/ML infrastructure as part of a project that won the grand prize in the NCATS A Specialized Platform for Innovative Research Exploration (ASPIRE) competition. More recently, the NIH awarded a grant to Chopra’s lab to develop a blockchain-based, open science AI framework . The researchers will use blockchain-distributed ledger technology from AI technology developer Onai Inc. to protect IP-sensitive information to promote greater collaboration and reproducibility among different organizations and laboratories.

In a tongue-in-cheek reference to fictional AI developer Skynet, Chopra’s team calls the AI agent’s infrastructure SCINET (Scientific Communication Interaction NETwork). It runs on an “operating system” dubbed LINQX (Ledger for INteractive Query eXecution) that can be expanded or adapted to AI agent-based applications for any instrument or scientific discipline.

To incorporate a new instrument, for example, the team creates a new agent, which is a “living digital twin” of the instrument, with access to the instrument’s command libraries and the ability to learn from usage. The agent can physically control some instruments in the lab, but if the instrument commands are not integrated, the instrument can be manually operated with the AI agent offering instructions from an adjacent laptop. Chopra recently published a new automation workflow for lipidomics on arXiv with the support of instrument manufacturer Agilent Technologies Inc.

As it formulates its workflow, the AI agent manager presents its reasoning for the actions it proposes in a series of “thought, action, observation” steps generated based on the question and the resources available.

“The AI isn’t a black box, it shows you what it is thinking based on your question and what’s available to it,” Chopra said.

And Chopra said the developers in his lab — including graduate students Matthew Muhoberac, Connor Beveridge and Sanjay Iyer — want the AI to augment human effort.

“A lot of the efforts out there are trying to replace humans. We’re not trying to replace the human, we’re trying to augment their work. The whole system helps and works with the user, and plans things from a user perspective,” Chopra said. The human sets the path and the system accelerates workflows with datasets, computational models, accelerates analysis, accelerates experiments to be done based on the plan.”

At its current level, Chopra said SCINET also softens the learning curve for new students who may not know how to code, don’t know protocols for specific tasks, or have no experience in how to use or troubleshoot a particular instrument. Unlike other AI agents, the Chopra team has implemented a memory feature in which the system learns with each query and could eventually become a true research partner.

“The agents start off as technicians, but over time I think they will become scientists to help plan and execute the best way of doing these experiments on these instruments and develop new workflows to accelerate scientific and drug discovery with humans,” Chopra said.

Writer: Mary Martialay, [email protected] Source: Gaurav Chopra, [email protected]

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts

Latest science news, discoveries and analysis

Could a rare mutation that causes dwarfism also slow ageing?

Bird flu in US cows: is the milk supply safe?

Future of Humanity Institute shuts: what's next for ‘deep future’ research?

Judge dismisses superconductivity physicist’s lawsuit against university

Nih pay raise for postdocs and phd students could have us ripple effect, hello puffins, goodbye belugas: changing arctic fjord hints at our climate future, china's moon atlas is the most detailed ever made, ‘shut up and calculate’: how einstein lost the battle to explain quantum reality, ecologists: don’t lose touch with the joy of fieldwork chris mantegna.

Should the Maldives be creating new land?

Lethal AI weapons are here: how can we control them?

Algorithm ranks peer reviewers by reputation — but critics warn of bias

How gliding marsupials got their ‘wings’

Bird flu virus has been spreading in us cows for months, rna reveals, audio long read: why loneliness is bad for your health, nato is boosting ai and climate research as scientific diplomacy remains on ice, rat neurons repair mouse brains — and restore sense of smell.

Retractions are part of science, but misconduct isn’t — lessons from a superconductivity lab

Any plan to make smoking obsolete is the right step

Citizenship privilege harms science

European ruling linking climate change to human rights could be a game changer — here’s how charlotte e. blattner, will ai accelerate or delay the race to net-zero emissions, current issue.

The Maldives is racing to create new land. Why are so many people concerned?

Surprise hybrid origins of a butterfly species, stripped-envelope supernova light curves argue for central engine activity, optical clocks at sea, research analysis.

Ancient DNA traces family lines and political shifts in the Avar empire

A chemical method for selective labelling of the key amino acid tryptophan

Robust optical clocks promise stable timing in a portable package

Targeting RNA opens therapeutic avenues for Timothy syndrome

Bioengineered ‘mini-colons’ shed light on cancer progression, galaxy found napping in the primordial universe, tumours form without genetic mutations, marsupial genomes reveal how a skin membrane for gliding evolved.

Scientists urged to collect royalties from the ‘magic money tree’

Breaking ice, and helicopter drops: winning photos of working scientists

Shrouded in secrecy: how science is harmed by the bullying and harassment rumour mill

Want to make a difference try working at an environmental non-profit organization, how ground glass might save crops from drought on a caribbean island, books & culture.

How volcanoes shaped our planet — and why we need to be ready for the next big eruption

Dogwhistles, drilling and the roots of Western civilization: Books in brief

Cosmic rentals

Las borinqueñas remembers the forgotten puerto rican women who tested the first pill, dad always mows on summer saturday mornings, nature podcast.

Latest videos

Nature briefing.

An essential round-up of science news, opinion and analysis, delivered to your inbox every weekday.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

New Research in Psychological Science

• Political Psychology
• Psychological Science
• Visual Attention

Compassion Fatigue as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: Believing Compassion Is Limited Increases Fatigue and Decreases Compassion Izzy Gainsburg and Julia Lee Cunningham  

Compassion has health and well-being benefits for the self and others. Unfortunately, people sometimes experience compassion fatigue—a decreased ability to feel compassion—when they are repeatedly exposed to people suffering. Thus, the present research explores a factor that can mitigate compassion fatigue: changing people’s compassion mindsets. Our research suggests that when people believe compassion is fatiguing and a limited resource, they experience more compassion fatigue and provide lower-quality social support; however, when people believe compassion is energizing and not limited, they feel less compassion fatigue and provide higher-quality social support. We also show that people can change their limited-compassion mindsets and become less susceptible to compassion fatigue. Altogether, this research cautions people against assuming they will experience compassion fatigue and to allow for the possibility that compassion for someone in need can be an energizing experience that motivates people to care about others in need, too. 

Different Representational Mechanisms for Imagery and Perception: Modulation Versus Excitation Thomas Pace, Roger Koenig-Robert, and Joel Pearson  

Imagine trying to describe a favorite memory to a friend. The mental image is not as defined or strong as the original experience, right? Our research delved into this phenomenon, showing that the process of mental imagery and visual perception are quite different. When we imagine something, we create a sort of picture in our mind, but without the sensory input that comes from the eyes. To help create this mental picture, our brain employs a clever strategy: It dims the activity related to elements we do not imagine, rather like turning down the background noise to focus on a conversation. This paradigm shift in our understanding might explain why mental imagery is seldom experienced as richly as perception and may put an upper limit to its strength. 

Gaze-Triggered Communicative Intention Compresses Perceived Temporal Duration Yiwen Yu, Li Wang, and Yi Jiang 

Our experience of time is not the authentic representation of physical time and can be distorted by the properties of the stimuli. In this research, we report a novel temporal illusion: that eye gaze, being a crucial social cue, can distort subjective time perception of unchanged objects. Specifically, adult participants compared the duration of two objects before and after they had implicitly seen that one object was consistently under gaze whereas the other object was never under gaze. We found that gaze-associated objects were perceived as having a shorter duration than nonassociated ones. This effect was driven by intention processing elicited by social cues, as nonsocial cues (i.e., arrows) and blocked gaze failed to induce such time distortions. Notably, individuals lower in autistic traits showed greater susceptibility to gaze-induced time distortions. This research highlights the role of high-level social function in time perception. Time flies faster when observers are confronted with objects that fell under others’ gaze. 

The Role of Humor Production and Perception in the Daily Life of Couples: An Interest-Indicator Perspective Kenneth Tan, Bryan Choy, and Norman Li  

Humor has typically been shown to promote attraction and is highly desired by potential mates, but the day-to-day unfolding of how humor affects relationship maintenance has rarely been examined. In this research, we tested whether relationship quality on a daily basis precedes humor or the other way around, using a sample of college students in Singapore. We found consistent evidence that individuals engaged in humorous interactions to the extent that they reported greater relationship quality on the previous day, but not the other way around. These findings enhance our understanding of the role of humor in relationship maintenance and highlight the importance of examining bidirectional processes between relationship quality and humor in interpersonal interactions.  

Listen to related Under the Cortex episode .

Numerical Representation for Action in Crows Obeys the Weber-Fechner Law Maximilian Kirschhock and Andreas Nieder  

Whereas the laws governing the judgment of perceived numbers of objects by the “number sense” have been studied in detail, the behavioral principles of equally important number representations for action are largely unexplored. We trained crows to judge numerical values of instruction stimuli from one to five and to flexibly perform a matching number of pecks. Our quantitative behavioral data show an impressive correspondence of number representations found in the motor domain with those described earlier in the sensory system. We report that nonsymbolic number production obeys the psychophysical Weber-Fechner law. Our report helps to resolve a classical debate in psychophysics. It suggests that this way of coding numerical information is not constrained to sensory or memory processes but constitutes a general principle of nonsymbolic number representations. Thus, logarithmic relationships between objective number and subjective numerical representations pervade not only sensation but also motor production.  

Feedback on this article? Email  [email protected]  or login to comment.

APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website. Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines .

Please login with your APS account to comment.

Latin American Psychological Science: Will the Global North Make Room?

Seven authors outline factors that influence scientific advancements in Latin America and identify potential avenues for reframing research conducted in the region, especially by Latin American researchers, in the global scientific landscape.

New APS Board Members Look to Strategic Plan, Emerging Researchers to Advance the Science

Three influential psychological scientists known for their work involving behavior change, intergroup relations, and memory have joined the APS Board of Directors for 2022–2023.

The Burden of the COVID-19 Pandemic May Motivate Outbreaks of Violent Protest and Antigovernment Sentiment

Civil unrest and political violence may be related to the psychological burden of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Privacy Overview

Planning and Writing a Research Proposal

• First Online: 25 February 2021

Cite this chapter

• C. George Thomas 2  

4449 Accesses

Research is a costly venture. In a research organization inclusive of university and college departments, funds for research are released only after careful scrutiny of the merit of the proposed work. A formal research proposal and its approval are also necessary for thesis works of students. In addition to the in-house funds of the organization, scientists may get funds from external agencies—both national and international. Fortunately, there are several funding agencies to promote research and development in specified areas, usually on project mode, by providing grants to individuals and groups. Therefore, instead of waiting for the meagre resources of parent institutions, scientists can approach a suitable external agency for financing research projects. Your success in obtaining a research grant means that you and your institution are benefited in various ways.

Good fortune is what happens when opportunity meets with planning . Thomas Alva Edison (1847–1931)

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

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

Calnan, J. 1976. One Way to Do Research: The A-Z for Those Who Must. Heinemann Medical Books, London, 250p.

Google Scholar  

Challa, J., Rama Rao, D., and Virmani, S.M. 2006. Developing Winning Research Proposals in Agricultural Research (2nd Ed.). National Academy of Agricultural Research Management, Hyderabad, 474p.

Day, R.A. and Gastel, B. 2006. How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper (6th Ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 320p.

Gray, D.E. 2014. Doing Research in the Real World (3rd Ed.). Sage Publications, London, 729p.

Hall, M.S. and Howlett, S. 2003. Getting Funded: A Complete Guide to Writing Proposals (4th Ed.). Continuing Education Press, Portland, USA, 180p.

Hamper, R.J. and Sue Baugh, L. 2010. Handbook for Writing Proposals (2nd Ed.), 256p.

Kalla, N.R. 1999. How to get research grant. Curr. Sci. 77(11): 1431–1434.

Kendall, M.J., and Hawkins, C. 1985. Planning and Protocol. In: Research: How to Plan, Speak and Write about It (4th Indian Reprint, 1993). Narosa Publishing House, New Delhi, pp. 12–28.

Kumar, R. 2011. Research Methodology: A Step-by step Guide for Beginners (3rd Ed.). Sage Publications India, New Delhi, 415p.

Leedy, P.D. and Ormrod, J.L. 2010. Practical Research: Planning and Design (9th Ed.), Pearson Education, New Jersey, 360p.

Lester, J.D. and Lester, J.D. Jr. 2009. Writing Research Papers: A Complete Guide (13th Ed.), Longman, London, 416p.

Malmfors, B., Garnsworthy, P., and Grossman, M. 2004. Writing and Presenting Scientific Papers (2nd Ed.). Viva Books, New Delhi, 153p.

Miner, J.T. and Miner, L.E. 2008. Proposal Planning and Writing (4th Ed.). Greenwood Publishing Group, USA, 201p.

NSF [National Science Foundation] 2004. A Guide for Proposal Writing [On line]. Available: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04016/nsf04016.pdf . [Accessed 5 Jan. 2019].

Punch, K.F. 2000. Developing Effective Research Proposals. Sage Publications, London. 125p.

Rubenstein, K.D., Heisey, P.W., Klotz-Ingram, C., and Frisvold, G.B. 2003. Competitive grants and the funding of agricultural research in the United States. Rev. Agric. Econ. 25(2): 352–368.

UN [United Nations] 2017. World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables. Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP/248. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, 46p. Available: https://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Publications/Files/WPP2017_KeyFindings.pdf [Accessed 10 Oct. 2018].

Walliman, N. 2011. Your Research Project: Designing and Planning Your Work (3rd Ed.). Sage Publications, New Delhi, 378p.

Ward, D. 2011. Writing Grant Proposals That Win (4th Ed.). Jones & Bartlett Publishers, Burlington, USA, 258p.

ACIAR - http://aciar.gov.au .

Belgian Development Cooperation - https://diplomatie.belgium.be/en/policy/development_cooperation .

Bill and Melinda Gates foundation - www.gatesfoundation.org .

CAPART - http://www.capart.nic.in .

CIDA - http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca .

CSIR - http://www.csir.res.in .

DANIDA - http://um.dk/en/danida-en/ .

DBT - http://dbtindia.nic.in .

Department of Health Research - http://www.dhr.gov.in .

Department of Higher Education - https://mhrd.gov.in/higher_education .

Department of Scientific & Industrial Research - http://www.dsir.nic.in .

Dept. Atomic Energy - http://www.dae.gov.in .

Dept. Chemicals & Petrochemicals - http://www.chemicals.nic.in .

DFID - http://www.dfid.gov.uk/ .

DRDO - www.drdo.gov.in .

DST - http://www.dst.gov.in .

Ford Foundation - http://www.fordfoundation.org .

ICAR - https://icar.org.in/ .

ICFRE - http://www.icfre.org .

ICHR - http://www.ichrindia.org .

ICMR - http://www.icmr.nic.in .

ICSSR - http://www.icssr.org .

McArthur Foundation - http://www.macfound.org .

Ministry of Earth Sciences - http://www.moes.gov.in .

Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change - http://www.moef.nic.in .

Ministry of Food Processing Industries - http://www.mofpi.nic.in .

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare - http://www.mohfw.nic.in .

Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Sources - http://www.vigyanprasar.gov.in .

NASF - http://www.icar.org.in/nfbsfara/index.html .

National Horticulture Board - http://www.nhb.gov.in .

National Medicinal Plant Board - http://www.nmpb.nic.in .

NICRA - http://www.nicra-icar.in/ .

Oil India Limited - http://www.oil-india.com .

Packard Foundation - https://www.packard.org .

Rockfeller Foundation - http://www.rockfellerfoundation.org .

SERB - http://www.serb.gov.in/ .

SIDA - http://www.sida.se/english .

State Council on S&T Gujarat - http://dst.gujarat.gov.in/gcst.htm .

State Council on S&T Haryana - http://www.dstharyana.org .

State Council on S&T Karnataka - http://www.kscst.org.in .

State Council on S&T Kerala - http://www.kscste.kerala.gov.in .

State Council on S&T Punjab - http://www.pscst.com .

State Council on S&T Tamil Nadu - http://www.tanscst.org .

State Council on S&T UP - http://www.cstup.gov.in .

State Council on S&T West Bengal - http://www.dstwb-counsil.gov.in .

State Council on S&T, Andhra Predesh - http://www.apcost.gov.in .

Toyota Foundation - http://www.toyotafound.or.jp/english .

UGC - https://www.ugc.ac.in .

USAID - https://www.usaid.gov .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur, Kerala, India

C. George Thomas

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. George Thomas .

Agencies providing grant support to research in science and technology.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Thomas, C.G. (2021). Planning and Writing a Research Proposal. In: Research Methodology and Scientific Writing . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64865-7_7

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64865-7_7

Published : 25 February 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-64864-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-64865-7

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Nixon Advisers’ Climate Research Plan: Another Lost Chance on the Road to Crisis

A 1971 plan for a global carbon dioxide monitoring network never came to fruition. the proposal is detailed in a document newly unearthed by the national security archive..

Share this article

A Pennsylvania County Is Suing the Fossil Fuel Industry for Damages Linked to Climate Change

MIT’s Sloan School Launches Ambitious Climate Center to Aid Policymakers

Exxon’s Own Research Confirmed Fossil Fuels’ Role in Global Warming Decades Ago

In 1971, President Richard Nixon’s science advisers proposed a multimillion dollar climate change research project with benefits they said were too “immense” to be quantified, since they involved “ensuring man’s survival,” according to a White House document newly obtained by the nonprofit National Security Archive and shared exclusively with Inside Climate News.

The plan would have established six global and 10 regional monitoring stations in remote locations to collect data on carbon dioxide, solar radiation, aerosols and other factors that exert influence on the atmosphere. It would have engaged five government agencies in a six-year initiative, with spending of $23 million in the project’s peak year of 1974—the equivalent of $172 million in today’s dollars. It would have used then-cutting-edge technology, some of which is only now being widely implemented in carbon monitoring more than 50 years later. 

But it stands as yet another lost opportunity early on the road to the climate crisis. Researchers at the National Security Archive, based at the George Washington University, could find no documentation of what happened to the proposal, and it was never implemented.

We’re hiring!

Please take a look at the new openings in our newsroom.

“Who knows what would have happened if we had some kind of concerted effort, just even on the monitoring side of things?” asked Rachel Santarsiero, an analyst who directs the National Security Archive’s Climate Change Transparency Project.

It turns out that the monitoring proposal, which was authorized by the head of Nixon’s White House Office of Science and Technology, Edward E. David Jr., did get a second life in another form. After leaving the Nixon administration, David joined the oil giant Exxon, and as president of the Exxon Research and Engineering Company from 1977 to 1986, he signed off on a groundbreaking Exxon project that used one of its oil tankers to gather atmospheric and oceanic carbon dioxide samples, beginning in 1979. That research, which was first reported by Inside Climate News in 2015, confirmed fossil fuels’ role in global warming. It also showed the oil industry knew the harm of its products and is now a key piece of evidence in lawsuits by states and cities across the country seeking compensation from the oil industry for climate damages.

The National Security Archive relies on the Freedom of Information Act to obtain such historical documents, and it currently maintains one of the largest non-governmental archives of declassified government documents—many relating to military and security issues. In the past year, the Archive has launched a project specifically to compile the historical record of the U.S. government’s reckoning with climate change. On Friday, to mark Earth Week, the group released a briefing book detailing climate change discussions in the Nixon White House, including the new document.

It has long been known that Nixon’s advisers warned him of the risks of global warming. A tranche of documents released by the Nixon Presidential Library in 2010 showed that his then-adviser Daniel Patrick Moynihan urged his administration to engage with the issue as early as 1969. Moynihan, who later served 24 years as U.S. Senator from New York, noted that sea level rise of 10 feet was possible with a 7-degree Fahrenheit (3.9-degree Celsius) temperature increase. “Goodbye, New York,” he wrote. “Goodbye Washington, for that matter.”

But the newly revealed Dec. 20, 1971, research proposal by the White House Office of Science and Technology shows for the first time that Nixon’s science advisors embarked on an extensive analysis of the potential risks of climate change and an assessment of the data needs. 

The purpose of the project would be to “assess current and future impact of natural climatic changes, provide alerts to potential catastrophic trends and gain new environmental insight and understanding as a basis for wise strategies,” reads the research plan, which is unsigned but was conducted under the authority of David.

Under a section marked “cost-benefit analysis,” the authors wrote, “No analysis is feasible. Benefits are immense, but not quantifiable, since this element contributes to ensuring man’s survival.”

Nixon’s aides proposed that the government embark on development of new instruments using lidar, or light-detecting and remote sensing—a technology then less than a decade old—to better measure carbon in the atmosphere. They were correct on the advantages of lidar, but it would be more than four decades until scientists at NASA and around the world began to implement its use to study not just the concentration of carbon dioxide, but its global distribution and daily variations.

“I felt like this document was really ahead of its time,” Santarsiero said.

Decades before a scientific consensus emerged on climate change, Nixon’s science advisers conveyed an understanding of the risks. Research, they wrote, would assist in “taking of protective measures against potential natural disasters such as large-scale inundation of low-lying coastal regions, broad extensions of ice sheets and severe health hazards.”

“No analysis is feasible. Benefits are immense, but not quantifiable, since this element contributes to ensuring man’s survival.”

The advisers showed awareness of the role of fossil fuel pollution in climate change, even if their understanding was incomplete. “Transportation on land or in the air exerts a deleterious effect upon the atmosphere and is in turn affected by it,” they wrote.

“They readily admitted that the science wasn’t there yet to solve these problems,” Santarsiero said. “But they said we still need to take action, and the science will grow alongside, to help us tackle these issues. That attitude just feels markedly different from the discourse that’s happening today, where we can’t even get general consensus, and that basically halts preventative or mitigation efforts in its tracks.”

Nixon, indeed, left behind a far more progressive record on the environment than his Republican successors. He proposed and established the Environmental Protection Agency and later embraced a national Earth Day, expanding on the idea launched earlier by U.S. Sen. Gaylord Nelson, a Wisconsin Democrat. Although the U.S. government never embarked on a carbon dioxide monitoring plan as ambitious as the one Nixon’s science advisers proposed, it would expand its research stations, as they advised, beyond the one site at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, which had been operating since 1958. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration opened additional carbon dioxide measurement stations at Barrow, Alaska; American Samoa; and South Pole, Antarctica, in 1973.

This story is funded by readers like you.

Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.

But by then, with the Watergate scandal engulfing Washington, the Nixon administration was unraveling. Nixon, who had privately railed against environmentalists for wanting humans to “go back and live like a bunch of damned animals,” as Santarsiero recollects in her briefing book, abolished his science and technology office. Its leader, David, quit in frustration early in 1973, according to his New York Times obituary in 2017.

While at Exxon, David continued to press for more science related to global warming, and in addition to the sampling research, he oversaw a transition to more climate modeling work—some of which was remarkably on target in its projection of temperature increase related to carbon dioxide concentrations. But in a coda to his career, he signed on to a 2012 Wall Street Journal opinion piece in which climate science skeptics argued there was no compelling reason to decarbonize the world’s economy.

Ultimately, U.S. government researchers at NASA, NOAA and other agencies would lead much of the science that led to a consensus on global warming. But government policy has lagged far behind the warnings of scientists, as the latest document from the Nixon archives underscores.

Marianne Lavelle

Reporter, washington, d.c..

Marianne Lavelle is a reporter for Inside Climate News. She has covered environment, science, law, and business in Washington, D.C. for more than two decades. She has won the Polk Award, the Investigative Editors and Reporters Award, and numerous other honors. Lavelle spent four years as online energy news editor and writer at National Geographic. She spearheaded a project on climate lobbying for the nonprofit journalism organization, the Center for Public Integrity. She also has worked at U.S. News and World Report magazine and The National Law Journal. While there, she led the award-winning 1992 investigation, “Unequal Protection,” on the disparity in environmental law enforcement against polluters in minority and white communities. Lavelle received her master’s degree from Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, and is a graduate of Villanova University.

• [email protected]

Newsletters

We deliver climate news to your inbox like nobody else. Every day or once a week, our original stories and digest of the web's top headlines deliver the full story, for free.

• Inside Clean Energy
• Today's Climate
• Breaking News
• I agree to the terms of service and privacy policy .

By Kiley Bense

By Phil McKenna

Part I of the Award-Winning Series: Exxon's Own Research Confirmed Fossil Fuels' Role in Global Warming Decades Ago

By neela banerjee, lisa song and david hasemyer, most popular.

Biochar Is ‘Low-Hanging Fruit’ for Sequestering Carbon and Combating Climate Change

By lindsey byman.

Sinking Coastal Lands Will Exacerbate the Flooding from Sea Level Rise in 24 US Cities, New Research Shows

By moriah mcdonald.

Virginia Seeks Millions of Dollars in Federal Funds Aimed at Reducing Pollution and Electrifying Transportation and Buildings

By jake bolster, ‘truth, reckoning and right relationship’: a rights of nature epiphany.

At an Earth Day gathering last week, activist Tish O’Dell said she’s come to realize that her efforts to secure legal rights for nature have to some extent been thwarted by human beings' stunted relationship with rivers, streams, wild animals and ecosystems.

By Katie Surma

Q&A: Thousands of American Climate Corps Jobs Are Now Open. What Will the New Program Look Like?

Power plant pollution targeted in sweeping actions by biden administration.

Keep Environmental Journalism Alive

ICN provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going.