Basic Steps in the Research Process

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

Step 1: Identify and develop your topic

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

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

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

Step 2 : Do a preliminary search for information

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

Step 3: Locate materials

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

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

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

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

Step 4: Evaluate your sources

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

Step 5: Make notes

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

Step 6: Write your paper

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

Step 7: Cite your sources properly

Give credit where credit is due; cite your sources.

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

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

Step 8: Proofread

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

Additional research tips:

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

Contact Information

Craig larson.

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

Get Started

How To Write a Research Paper

Welcome to the writing libguide.

  • 1. Understand the Assignment
  • 2. Choose Topic & Write Thesis Statement
  • 3. Create Concept Map & Keyword List
  • 4. Research Your Topic
  • 5. Create an Outline
  • 6. Write the Paper
  • Assignment Calculator

Welcome to the research guide with step-by-step instructions on how to write a research paper.  The following sections will guide you through the writing process and with finding articles, books, and eBooks for your research paper assignments.

The sections on plagiarism and citations will explain these two concepts and how you can apply them to your academic writing.

Please contact the library if your need help with finding articles, books, and eBooks for your research paper.

Please contact the Academic Success Center for assistance with the writing process.

6 steps in research paper

  • Next: 1. Understand the Assignment >>
  • Last Updated: Oct 31, 2023 9:15 AM
  • URL: https://libguides.seminolestate.edu/researchpaper

Enago Academy

  • Step 1: Sections in a Research Paper
  • Step 2: Order for Preparation
  • Step 3: Conceptualizing an Attractive Title
  • Step 4: Effectively Reviewing Literature
  • Step 5: Drafting the Abstract
  • Step 6: Drafting Introduction
  • Step 7: Drafting Materials and Methods
  • Step 8: Drafting Results
  • Step 9: Drafting Discussion
  • Step 10: Drafting the Conclusion
  • Step 11: Citing and Referencing
  • Step 12: Preparing Figures
  • Step 13: Preparing Tables
  • Step 14: Assigning Authorship
  • Step 15: Acknowledgements Section
  • Step 16: Checking the Author Guidelines
  • Step 17: Proofreading and Editing
  • Step 18: Pre-submission Peer-Review
  • Step 1: How to Structure a Research Paper?
  • Step 3: How to Conceptualize an Attractive Research Paper Title?
  • Step 4: How to Conduct an Effective Literature Review
  • Step 5: How to Write a Good Research Paper Abstract
  • Step 6: How to Write a Compelling Introduction for a Research Paper
  • Step 7: How to Write the Materials and Methods Section of a Research Paper
  • Step 8: How to Write the Results Section of a Research Paper
  • Step 9: How to Write the Discussion Section of a Research Paper
  • Step 10: How to Write the Conclusion of a Research Paper
  • Step 15: How to Write an Acknowledgment Section for a Research Paper

How to Write a Research Paper – A to Z of Academic Writing

Part of a scientist’s job is to publish research. In fact, some would argue that your experiment is only complete once you have published the results. This makes it available to the scientific community for authentication and the advancement of science. In addition, publishing is essential for a researcher’s career as it validates the research and opens doors for funding and employment. In this section, we give you a step-by-step guide to help you write an effective research paper. So, remember to set aside half an hour each day to write. This habit will make your writing manageable and keep you focused.

There are different types of research papers. The most common ones include:

Original research paper, rapid communication or letter, review article, meeting abstract, paper, and proceedings.

6 steps in research paper

This is a full report written by researchers covering the analysis of their experimental study from start to finish. It is the most common type research manuscript that is published in academic journals. Original articles are expected to follow the IMRAD format.

These are usually written to publish results urgently in rapidly changing or highly competitive fields. They will be brief and may not be separated by headings.It consists of original preliminary results that are likely to have a significant impact in the respective field.

This is a comprehensive summary of a certain topic. It is usually requested by a journal editor and written by a leader in the field. It includes current assessment, latest findings, and future directions of the field. It is a massive undertaking in which approximately 100 research articles are cited. Uninvited reviews are published too, but it is best to send a pre-submission enquiry letter to the journal editor first.

This is mostly used in the medical field to report interesting occurrences such as previously unknown or emerging pathologies. It could be a report of a single case or multiple cases and will include a short introduction, methods, results, and discussion.

This is a brief report of research presented at an organized meeting such as a conference. These range from an abstract to a full report of the research. It needs to be focused and clear in explaining your topic and the main points of the study that will be shared with the audience.

  • STEP 1: How to Structure a Research Paper?
  • STEP 2: Order for Preparation of the Manuscript
  • STEP 3: How to Conceptualize an Attractive Research Paper Title?
  • STEP 4: How to Conduct an Effective Literature Review
  • STEP 5: How to Write a Good Research Paper Abstract
  • STEP 6: How to Write a Compelling Introduction for a Research Paper
  • STEP 7: How to Write the Materials and Methods Section of a Research Paper
  • STEP 8: How to Write the Results Section of a Research Paper
  • STEP 9: How to Write the Discussion Section of a Research Paper
  • STEP 10: How to Write the Conclusion of a Research Paper
  • STEP 11: Effectively Citing and Referencing Your Sources
  • STEP 12: Preparing Figures
  • STEP 13: Preparing Tables
  • STEP 14: Assigning Authorship
  • STEP 15: How to Write an Acknowledgment Section for a Research Paper
  • STEP 16: Checking the Author Guidelines Before Preparing the Manuscript
  • STEP 17: Proofreading and Editing Your Manuscript
  • STEP 18: Pre-submission Peer-Review

How to Structure a Research Paper?

Your research paper should tell a story of how you began your research, what you found, and how it advances your research field. It is important to structure your research paper so that editors and readers can easily find information. The widely adopted structure that research papers mostly follow is the IMRaD format . IMRaD stands for Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. Additional requirements from journals include an abstract, keywords, acknowledgements, and references. This format helps scientists to tell their story in an organized manner. Authors often find it easier to write the IMRaD sections in a different order. However, the final paper should be collated in the IMRaD format as follows:

6 steps in research paper

Case studies follow a slightly different format to the traditional IMRAD format. They include the following extra sections:

  • History and physical examination: Details of the patient’s history. It provides the story of when a patient first sought medical care.
  • Diagnostic focus and assessment : Describe the steps taken that lead to a diagnosis and any test results.
  • Therapeutic focus and assessment: Explain therapies tried and any other recommendations from consultants. Assess the efficacy of the treatments given.
  • Follow-up and outcome: Provide results and state the patient adhered to treatment. Include any side effects.
  • Patient perspective: Describe the patient’s experience.
  • Patient consent: State that informed consent was obtained from the patient.

Order for Preparation of the Manuscript

As mentioned above, most research publications follow the IMRAD format. However, it is often easier to write each section in a different order than that of the final paper.

Authors recommend you organize the data first and then write the sections as follows:

  • Figures and tables: Decide how your data should be presented. You can use graphics, tables or describe it in the text.
  • Methods: It is important that anyone can use your methods to reproduce your experiments.
  • Results: Here you write only what the results of your experiments were. You do not discuss them here.
  • Discussion: This section requires analysis, thought, and a thorough understanding of the literature. You need to discuss your results without repeating the results section.
  • Conclusion: This section can either be under a sub-heading or the last paragraph of the discussion. It should inform the reader how your results advance the field.
  • Introduction: Now that you have thought about your results in the context of the literature, you can write your introduction.
  • Abstract: This is an overview of your paper. Give a concise background of the problem and how you tried to solve it. Next state your main findings.
  • Title: As discussed above, this needs to be concise as well as informative. Ensure that it makes sense.
  • Keywords: These are used for indexing. Keywords need to be specific. Often you are not allowed to use words that appear in the journal name. Use abbreviations with care and only well-established ones.
  • Acknowledgements: This section is to thank anyone involved in the research that does not qualify as an author.
  • References: Check the “Guide for authors” for the formatting style. Be accurate and do not include unnecessary references.

How to Conceptualize an Attractive Research Paper Title?

Your research title is the first impression of your paper. A good research paper title is a brief description of the topic, method, sample, and results of your study. A useful formula you could use is:

6 steps in research paper

There are different ways to write a research paper title :

Declarative

State the main conclusions. Example: Mixed strains of probiotics improve antibiotic associated diarrhea.

Descriptive

Describe the subject. Example: Effects of mixed strains of probiotics on antibiotic associated diarrhea.

Interrogative

Use a question for the subject. Example: Do mixed strains of probiotics improve antibiotic associated diarrhea?

We recommend the following five top tips to conceptualize an attractive research title:

  • Be descriptive
  • Use a low word count (5-15 words)
  • Check journal guidelines
  • Avoid jargon and symbols

How to Conduct an Effective Literature Review

The process of conducting a literature review can be overwhelming. However, if you start with a clear research question, you can stay focused.

  • Literature search: Search for articles related to your research question. Keep notes of the search terms and keywords you use. A list of databases to search and notes of the ones you have searched will prevent duplicate searches.

- What is their research question?

- Are there potential conflicts of interest such as funders who may want a particular result?

- Are their methods sufficient to test the objectives?

- Can you identify any flaws in the research?

- Do their results make sense, or could there be other reasons for their conclusion?

- Are the authors respected in the field?

- Has the research been cited?

- Introduction: Here you introduce the topic. The introduction describes the problem and identifies gaps in knowledge. It also rationalizes your research.

- Discussion: Here you support and compare your results. Use the literature to put your research in context with the current state of knowledge. Furthermore, show how your research has advanced the field.

How to Write a Good Research Paper Abstract

The importance of research paper abstracts  cannot be emphasized enough.

  • They are used by online databases to index large research works. Therefore, critical keywords must be used.
  • Editors and reviewers read an abstract to decide whether an article is worth considering for publication.
  • Readers use an abstract to decide whether the research is relevant to them.

A good research paper abstract is a concise and appealing synopsis of your research. There are two ways to write an abstract:  structured and unstructured research abstracts . The author guidelines of the journal you are submitting your research to will tell you the format they require.

  • The structured abstract has distinct sections with headings. This style enables a reader to easily find the relevant information under clear headings (objective, methods, results, and conclusion). Think of each section as a question and provide a concise but detailed answer under each heading.
  • The unstructured abstract is a narrative paragraph of your research. It is similar to the structured abstract but does not contain headings. It gives the context, findings, conclusion, and implications of your paper.

How to Write a Compelling Introduction for a Research Paper

The Introduction section of your research paper introduces your research  in the context of the knowledge in the field. First introduce the topic including the problem you are addressing, the importance of solving this problem, and known research and gaps in the knowledge. Then narrow it down to your research questions and hypothesis.

Tips to write an effective introduction for your research paper :

  • Give broad background information about the problem.
  • Write it in a logical manner so that the reader can follow your thought process.
  • Focus on the problem you intend to solve with your research
  • Note any solutions in the literature thus far.
  • Propose your solution to the problem with reasons.

Done with drafting your research paper?

With enago’s english editing & proofreading service your success is just a step away.

6 steps in research paper

How to Write the Materials and Methods Section of a Research Paper

When writing the Materials and Methods section of a research paper, you need to give enough detail in your methods  so that others can reproduce your experiments. However, there is no need to detail established experiments. Readers can find these details in the previously published references you refer to in the methods. Follow these tips to write the Materials and Methods section of your research paper: :

  • Write in the past tense because you are reporting on procedures you carried out.
  • Avoid unnecessary details that disrupts the flow.
  • Materials and equipments should be mentioned throughout the procedure, rather than listed at the beginning of a section.
  • Detail any ethics or consent requirements if your study included humans or animal subjects.
  • Use standard nomenclature and numbers.
  • Ensure you have the correct control experiments.
  • Methods should be listed logically.
  • Detail statistical methods used to analyze your data.

Here is a checklist of things that should be in your Materials and Methods:

  • References of previously published methods.
  • Study settings : If the research involves studying a population, give location and context of the site.
  • Cell lines : Give their source and detail any contamination tests performed.
  • Antibodies : Give details such as catalogue numbers, citations, dilutions used, and batch numbers.
  • Animal models : Species, age, and sex of animals as well as ethical compliance information.
  • Human subjects : Ethics committee requirements and a statement confirming you received informed consent. If relevant, clinical trial registration numbers and selection criteria.
  • Data accession codes for data you deposited in a repository.
  • Software : Where you obtained the programs and their version numbers.
  • Statistics : Criteria for including or excluding samples or subjects, randomisation methods, details of investigator blinding to avoid bias, appropriateness of statistical tests used for your study.
  • Timeframes if relevant.

How to Write the Results Section of a Research Paper

Some journals combine the results and discussion section, whereas others have separate headings for each section. If the two sections are combined, you state the results of your research   and discuss them immediately afterwards, before presenting your next set of results.  The challenge is to present your data in a way that is logical and accurate. Set out your results in the same order as you set out your methods.

When writing the Results section of your research paper remember to include:

  • Control group data.
  • Relevant statistical values such as p-values.
  • Visual illustrations of your results such as figures and tables.

Things that do not belong in the results section:

  • Speculation or commentary about the results.
  • References – you are reporting your own data.
  • Do not repeat data in text if it has been presented in a table or graph.

Keep the discussion section separate . Keep explanations, interpretations, limitations, and comparisons to the literature for the discussion.

How to Write the Discussion Section of a Research Paper

The discussion section of your research paper answers several questions such as: did you achieve your objectives? How do your results compare to other studies? Were there any limitations to your research? Start discussing your data specifically and then broaden out to how it furthers your field of interest.

Questions to get you started:

  • How do your results answer your objectives?
  • Why do you think your results are different to published data?
  • Do you think further research would help clarify any issues with your data?

The aim is to tell the reader what your results mean. Structure the discussion section of your research paper  in a logical manner. Start with an introductory paragraph where you set out the context and main aims of the study. Do this without repeating the introduction. Some authors prefer starting with the major findings first to keep the readers interested.

The next paragraph should discuss what you found, how it compares to other studies, any limitations, your opinion, and what they mean for the field.

The concluding paragraph should talk about the major outcomes of the study. Be careful not to write your conclusion here. Merely highlight the main themes emerging from your data.

Tips to write an effective discussion:

  • It is not a literature review. Keep your comments relevant to your results.
  • Interpret your results.
  • Be concise and remove unnecessary words.
  • Do not include results not presented in the result section.
  • Ensure your conclusions are supported by your data.

How to Write the Conclusion of a Research Paper

While writing the conclusion for your research paper, give a summary of your research with emphasis on your findings. Again, structuring the conclusion section of your research paper  will make it easier to draft this section. Here are some tips when writing the conclusion of your paper:

  • State what you set out to achieve.
  • Tell the reader what your major findings were.
  • How has your study contributed to the field?
  • Mention any limitations.
  • End with recommendations for future research.

Having difficulties with understanding concepts on academic writing?

Enago learn can guide you through the manuscript preparation process and help you achieve success.

6 steps in research paper

Effectively Citing and Referencing Your Sources

You need to acknowledge the original work  that you talk about in your write-up. There are two reasons for this. First, cite someone’s idea  to avoid plagiarism. Plagiarism is when you use words or ideas of others without acknowledging them and this is a serious offence. Second, readers will be able to source the literature you cited easily.

This is done by citing works  in your text and providing the full reference for this citation in a reference list at the end of your document.

Tips for effective refencing/citations:

  • Keep a detailed list of your references including author(s), publication, year of publication, title, and page numbers.
  • Insert a citation (either a number or author name) in-text as you write.
  • List the full reference in a reference list according to the style required by the publication.
  • Pay attention to details as mistakes will misdirect readers.

Try referencing software tools “cite while you write”. Examples of such referencing software programs include: Mendeley , Endnote , Refworks  and Zotero .

Preparing Figures

Some quick tips about figures:

  • Legends of graphs and tables must be self-explanatory.
  • Use easily distinguishable symbols.
  • Place long tables of data in the supplementary material.
  • Include a scale bar in photographs.

Preparing Tables

Important pointers for tables:

  • Check the author guidelines for table formatting requirements.
  • Tables do not have vertical lines in publications.
  • Legends must be self-explanatory.

Assigning Authorship

To qualify as an author  on a paper, an individual must:

  • Make substantial contributions to all stages of the research.
  • Draft or revise the manuscript.
  • Approve the final version of the article.
  • Be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the research.

Unethical and unprofessional authorships  have emerged over the years. These include:

  • Gift authorship : An individual is listed as a co-author in lieu of funding or supervision.
  • Ghost authorship : An author is paid to write an article but does not contribute to the article in any other way.
  • Guest authorship : An individual who is given authorship because they are well known and respected in the field, or they are senior members of staff.

These authors pose a threat to research. Readers may override their concerns with an article if it includes a well-respected co-author. This is especially problematic when decisions about medical interventions are concerned.

How to Write an Acknowledgment Section for a Research Paper

Those who do not qualify as authors but have contributed to the research should be given credit in the acknowledgements section of your research paper . These include funders, supervisors, administrative supporters, writing, editing, and proofreading assistance .

The contributions made by these individuals should be stated and sometimes their written permission to be acknowledged is required by editors.

Has your target journal's author guidelines left you confused?

With enago consult you can talk to our experts through live 1-to-1 video calls.

6 steps in research paper

Points to Note from the Author Instructions Before Preparing the Manuscript

Check the author guidelines for your chosen publication before submission. Publishers mostly have a “House Style” that ensures all their manuscripts are consistent with regards to language, formatting, and style. For example, these guidelines will tell you whether to use UK or US English, which abbreviations are allowed, and how to format figures and tables. They are also especially important for the references section as each journal has their own style.

Proofreading/Editing your Manuscript

Ensure that your manuscript is structured correctly, clearly written, contains the correct technical language, and supports your claims with proper evidence. To ensure the structure is correct, it is essential to edit your paper .

Once you are happy with the manuscript, proofread for small errors. These could be spelling, consistency, spacing, and so forth. Importantly, check that figures and tables include all the necessary data and statistical values. Seek assistance from colleagues or professional editing companies to edit and proofread your manuscript too.

Pre-submission Peer-Review of Your Manuscript

A pre-submission peer-review  could improve the quality of articles submitted to journals in general. The benefits include:

  • A fresh eye to spot gaps or errors.
  • Receiving constructive feedback on your work and writing.
  • Improves the clarity of your paper.

You could ask experienced colleagues, supervisors or even professional editing services to review your article.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

6 steps in research paper

When should AI tools be used in university labs?

TCK Publishing

How to Write a Research Paper in 6 Steps

by Kaelyn Barron

How to Write a Research Paper: The Complete Guide for Students Image

Research papers are a fact of life for any high school or university student. Tears of frustration, endless refills of strong coffee, long hours staring blankly at a computer screen—these might be some of the images that come to mind if you’ve ever had the pleasure of writing one.

But what if there was a better way?

How to Write a Research Paper

If you know how to properly prepare for a research paper (and don’t procrastinate until the very last minute), you’ll find that the process actually isn’t so painful. In fact, you might actually enjoy learning something in depth.

By choosing the right topic, conducting proper research, and organizing an efficient outline, you can ace your next research paper and avoid hellish all-nighters.

1. Choose a Research Topic

The first step in your research odyssey is finding the right topic, which is actually just a question that you want to answer.

You can start by reading up on a general topic that interests you. As you read, take notes and bookmark anything that strikes you. Most importantly, be curious and ask questions.

Is there something you feel could be better explained, or a subtopic that merits greater attention?

You’ll want to choose a topic that interests you and allows you to contribute a relatively new angle, but not something so specific that you can’t find sources.

Here’s an example of how the topic selection process can work:

1. Start with a topic: Post-conflict reconstruction 2. Narrow your focus: Women and post-conflict reconstruction in South Africa 3. Generate a researchable question: What role did women have in the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions of South Africa, and how can states work to better include them in the future?

As you can see, the first part of this question can be answered with research, while the second half will allow you to contribute your original thoughts and suggestions based on your research.

Some quick Googling should show you if there is enough information available to work with, or if a certain subject has already been exhausted.

If you’re a university student, most likely your school’s library has access to large databases and research tools like JSTOR, Lexis Nexis, DOAJ, and so on.

Definitely take advantage of these, as they contain thousands of articles from academic journals.

Other great resources include:

  • Google Scholar
  • Online encyclopedias*
  • Government publications

*Most teachers and professors will strongly discourage you from using Wikipedia in your research, as pages can be edited by anyone at any time.

However, you may find Wikipedia helpful for finding some general information to guide your research, and you can always scroll to the bottom of the page to be redirected to the article’s original sources.

When you take notes from a source, always remember to include a proper citation of it in your paper. There are lots of great online citation generator tools to make creating citations easy and pain free!

2. Develop a Thesis Statement

Now that you’ve done your research, it’s time to develop a thesis statement .

A thesis statement is a sentence (or sometimes 2-3 sentences) that conveys the main point of your essay and tells readers what you’ll be explaining or arguing. It’s usually found within the first paragraphs of your paper.

Thesis Statement Example:

Governments should take stronger action against climate change because doing so can create more jobs, raise the quality of living, and decrease health complications associated with pollution.

It’s good practice to draft a thesis statement before writing your research paper, since every point you make in your paper should work to support this statement.

However, it’s not uncommon at all to rework your thesis a few times as you dive deeper into your research.

In fact, it’s okay if you change your mind about your argument or even find that you’ve disproven your thesis (hopefully you’ll give yourself plenty of time to allow for adjustments!)

You never want to start with the approach that your thesis is the only answer, because then you’ll be more likely to conduct biased research (searching only for sources that confirm your initial assumption and ignoring the rest).

Remember that good research is thorough, honest, and comes from a variety of sources.

3. Create an Outline

Create an outline to organize your thoughts before you start writing your paper.

Think about what you’ve found in your research and how it can best be organized to support your thesis.

Your main points will be your sub-headings, so find the supporting information for each headline and organize it accordingly.

Keep in mind that not every note you jotted down during the research process will be necessary. Information that doesn’t directly support your thesis does not need to be included.

4. Write Your Research Paper

The outline is a great tool for guiding and organizing your thoughts, but your ideas could always evolve. You might also come up with new ones once you start writing, so stay flexible as you begin composing your first draft.

Introduction

Your introduction should present the background and context for the rest of your paper. Without directly stating your purpose, it should be clear whether your paper is trying to explain, describe, analyze, or persuade readers.

The introduction should also provide context that answers the following questions:

  • What will you argue/explain?
  • Why does your research matter?
  • If persuasive, what action do you want your readers to take?

The thesis statement is usually included toward the end of your introduction, but this can vary case by case.

The body of your paper should contain your key points and supporting evidence. Remember that you aren’t limited to what’s on your outline.

There are many different ways to organize your body paragraphs, but you should make each section relatively balanced (in other words, don’t write three sentences for one point and one page for another).

You might also consider ending with your strongest point to deliver a more impactful finish.

You’re not done yet! Your conclusion should present your rephrased thesis statement and briefly summarize your paper’s main points.

If you feel any aspects deserve further research—or if you came across any limitations to your research—you can also mention that here.

You might be tired, but try to leave with a lasting impression as powerful as the first you made in your introduction.

5. Reread, Revise, and Edit

If you haven’t waited until the eleventh hour to write your paper, put it away for a day or two before you start the revision process. This way, you’ll have a fresh set of eyes to catch any structural or grammatical errors.

Make sure that your ideas follow a logical sequence and that your arguments actually support your thesis.

Then, you can move onto the details, like checking for repeated phrases, punctuation errors, weak word choice, and other grammatical mistakes.

You can also try running your paper through a grammar and plagiarism checker like Grammarly , just to give it one more comb-through.

6. Cite and Format Your Research Sources

Proper citations are a must for any research paper. Check with your professor to make sure you’re using the proper style.

There are plenty of online resources available that will format your citations for you in APA, MLA, Chicago, and other styles if you simply enter the appropriate information.

If you borrowed any phrases or ideas without proper attribution, you could land in some hot water for plagiarism, so always take the time to double check.

Tips for Better Research

Next time you’re assigned a research paper, try using some of these tips to prepare and write with confidence.

Organizing your research and producing a solid outline will help you finish faster and probably even score  a better grade!

Do you have any tips for writing a research paper? Feel free to share in the comments below!

If you found this post helpful, then you might also like:

  • 31 Best Online Research Tools
  • 9 of the Best Citation Generators to Make Your Research Easier
  • The 4 Main Writing Styles: Definitions, Examples, and Techniques
  • The 10 Most Common Grammar Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

Kaelyn Barron

As a blog writer for TCK Publishing, Kaelyn loves crafting fun and helpful content for writers, readers, and creative minds alike. She has a degree in International Affairs with a minor in Italian Studies, but her true passion has always been writing. Working remotely allows her to do even more of the things she loves, like traveling, cooking, and spending time with her family.

Book Deals

Learn More About

  • Fiction (223)
  • Nonfiction (70)
  • Blogging (46)
  • Book Promotion (28)
  • How to Get Reviews (9)
  • Audiobooks (17)
  • Book Design (11)
  • Ebook Publishing (13)
  • Hybrid Publishing (8)
  • Print Publishing (9)
  • Self Publishing (70)
  • Traditional Publishing (53)
  • How to Find an Editor (11)
  • Fitness (4)
  • Mindfulness and Meditation (7)
  • Miscellaneous (114)
  • New Releases (17)
  • Career Development (73)
  • Online Courses (46)
  • Productivity (45)
  • Personal Finance (21)
  • Podcast (179)
  • Poetry Awards Contest (2)
  • Publishing News (8)
  • Readers Choice Awards (5)
  • Reading Tips (145)
  • Software (17)
  • Technology (13)
  • Contests (4)
  • Grammar (51)
  • Word Choice (63)
  • Writing a Book (62)
  • Writing Fiction (195)
  • Writing Nonfiction (66)
  • PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
  • EDIT Edit this Article
  • EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
  • Browse Articles
  • Learn Something New
  • Quizzes Hot
  • This Or That Game New
  • Train Your Brain
  • Explore More
  • Support wikiHow
  • About wikiHow
  • Log in / Sign up
  • Education and Communications
  • College University and Postgraduate
  • Academic Writing
  • Research Papers

How to Write a Research Paper

Last Updated: February 18, 2024 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Chris Hadley, PhD . Chris Hadley, PhD is part of the wikiHow team and works on content strategy and data and analytics. Chris Hadley earned his PhD in Cognitive Psychology from UCLA in 2006. Chris' academic research has been published in numerous scientific journals. There are 14 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 4,172,962 times.

Whether you’re in a history, literature, or science class, you’ll probably have to write a research paper at some point. It may seem daunting when you’re just starting out, but staying organized and budgeting your time can make the process a breeze. Research your topic, find reliable sources, and come up with a working thesis. Then create an outline and start drafting your paper. Be sure to leave plenty of time to make revisions, as editing is essential if you want to hand in your best work!

Sample Research Papers and Outlines

6 steps in research paper

Researching Your Topic

Step 1 Focus your research on a narrow topic.

  • For instance, you might start with a general subject, like British decorative arts. Then, as you read, you home in on transferware and pottery. Ultimately, you focus on 1 potter in the 1780s who invented a way to mass-produce patterned tableware.

Tip: If you need to analyze a piece of literature, your task is to pull the work apart into literary elements and explain how the author uses those parts to make their point.

Step 2 Search for credible sources online and at a library.

  • Authoritative, credible sources include scholarly articles (especially those other authors reference), government websites, scientific studies, and reputable news bureaus. Additionally, check your sources' dates, and make sure the information you gather is up to date.
  • Evaluate how other scholars have approached your topic. Identify authoritative sources or works that are accepted as the most important accounts of the subject matter. Additionally, look for debates among scholars, and ask yourself who presents the strongest evidence for their case. [3] X Trustworthy Source Purdue Online Writing Lab Trusted resource for writing and citation guidelines Go to source
  • You’ll most likely need to include a bibliography or works cited page, so keep your sources organized. List your sources, format them according to your assigned style guide (such as MLA or Chicago ), and write 2 or 3 summary sentences below each one. [4] X Research source

Step 3 Come up with a preliminary thesis.

  • Imagine you’re a lawyer in a trial and are presenting a case to a jury. Think of your readers as the jurors; your opening statement is your thesis and you’ll present evidence to the jury to make your case.
  • A thesis should be specific rather than vague, such as: “Josiah Spode’s improved formula for bone china enabled the mass production of transfer-printed wares, which expanded the global market for British pottery.”

Drafting Your Essay

Step 1 Create an outline

  • Your outline is your paper’s skeleton. After making the outline, all you’ll need to do is fill in the details.
  • For easy reference, include your sources where they fit into your outline, like this: III. Spode vs. Wedgewood on Mass Production A. Spode: Perfected chemical formula with aims for fast production and distribution (Travis, 2002, 43) B. Wedgewood: Courted high-priced luxury market; lower emphasis on mass production (Himmelweit, 2001, 71) C. Therefore: Wedgewood, unlike Spode, delayed the expansion of the pottery market.

Step 2 Present your thesis...

  • For instance, your opening line could be, “Overlooked in the present, manufacturers of British pottery in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries played crucial roles in England’s Industrial Revolution.”
  • After presenting your thesis, lay out your evidence, like this: “An examination of Spode’s innovative production and distribution techniques will demonstrate the importance of his contributions to the industry and Industrial Revolution at large.”

Tip: Some people prefer to write the introduction first and use it to structure the rest of the paper. However, others like to write the body, then fill in the introduction. Do whichever seems natural to you. If you write the intro first, keep in mind you can tweak it later to reflect your finished paper’s layout.

Step 3 Build your argument in the body paragraphs.

  • After setting the context, you'd include a section on Josiah Spode’s company and what he did to make pottery easier to manufacture and distribute.
  • Next, discuss how targeting middle class consumers increased demand and expanded the pottery industry globally.
  • Then, you could explain how Spode differed from competitors like Wedgewood, who continued to court aristocratic consumers instead of expanding the market to the middle class.
  • The right number of sections or paragraphs depends on your assignment. In general, shoot for 3 to 5, but check your prompt for your assigned length.

Step 4 Address a counterargument to strengthen your case.

  • If you bring up a counterargument, make sure it’s a strong claim that’s worth entertaining instead of ones that's weak and easily dismissed.
  • Suppose, for instance, you’re arguing for the benefits of adding fluoride to toothpaste and city water. You could bring up a study that suggested fluoride produced harmful health effects, then explain how its testing methods were flawed.

Step 5 Summarize your argument...

  • Sum up your argument, but don’t simply rewrite your introduction using slightly different wording. To make your conclusion more memorable, you could also connect your thesis to a broader topic or theme to make it more relatable to your reader.
  • For example, if you’ve discussed the role of nationalism in World War I, you could conclude by mentioning nationalism’s reemergence in contemporary foreign affairs.

Revising Your Paper

Step 1 Ensure your paper...

  • This is also a great opportunity to make sure your paper fulfills the parameters of the assignment and answers the prompt!
  • It’s a good idea to put your essay aside for a few hours (or overnight, if you have time). That way, you can start editing it with fresh eyes.

Tip: Try to give yourself at least 2 or 3 days to revise your paper. It may be tempting to simply give your paper a quick read and use the spell-checker to make edits. However, revising your paper properly is more in-depth.

Step 2 Cut out unnecessary words and other fluff.

  • The passive voice, such as “The door was opened by me,” feels hesitant and wordy. On the other hand, the active voice, or “I opened the door,” feels strong and concise.
  • Each word in your paper should do a specific job. Try to avoid including extra words just to fill up blank space on a page or sound fancy.
  • For instance, “The author uses pathos to appeal to readers’ emotions” is better than “The author utilizes pathos to make an appeal to the emotional core of those who read the passage.”

Step 3 Proofread

  • Read your essay out loud to help ensure you catch every error. As you read, check for flow as well and, if necessary, tweak any spots that sound awkward. [13] X Trustworthy Source University of North Carolina Writing Center UNC's on-campus and online instructional service that provides assistance to students, faculty, and others during the writing process Go to source

Step 4 Ask a friend, relative, or teacher to read your work before you submit it.

  • It’s wise to get feedback from one person who’s familiar with your topic and another who’s not. The person who knows about the topic can help ensure you’ve nailed all the details. The person who’s unfamiliar with the topic can help make sure your writing is clear and easy to understand.

You Might Also Like

Get Started With a Research Project

Community Q&A

Community Answer

  • Remember that your topic and thesis should be as specific as possible. Thanks Helpful 5 Not Helpful 0
  • Researching, outlining, drafting, and revising are all important steps, so do your best to budget your time wisely. Try to avoid waiting until the last minute to write your paper. Thanks Helpful 6 Not Helpful 2

6 steps in research paper

  • ↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/assignments/planresearchpaper/
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/evaluating-print-sources/
  • ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/conducting_research/research_overview/index.html
  • ↑ https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/writing/graduate-writing-lab/writing-through-graduate-school/working-sources
  • ↑ https://opentextbc.ca/writingforsuccess/chapter/chapter-5-putting-the-pieces-together-with-a-thesis-statement/
  • ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/the_writing_process/developing_an_outline/index.html
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/introductions/
  • ↑ https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/writingprocess/counterarguments
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/pages/ending-essay-conclusions
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/revising-drafts/
  • ↑ https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/formandstyle/writing/scholarlyvoice/activepassive
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/editing-and-proofreading/
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/reading-aloud/
  • ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/the_writing_process/proofreading/index.html

About This Article

Chris Hadley, PhD

To write a research paper, start by researching your topic at the library, online, or using an academic database. As you conduct your research and take notes, zero in on a specific topic that you want to write about and create a 1-2 sentence thesis to state the focus of your paper. Then, create an outline that includes an introduction, 3 to 5 body paragraphs to present your arguments, and a conclusion to sum up your main points. Once you have your paper's structure organized, draft your paragraphs, focusing on 1 argument per paragraph. Use the information you found through your research to back up your claims and prove your thesis statement. Finally, proofread and revise your content until it's polished and ready to submit. For more information on researching and citing sources, read on! Did this summary help you? Yes No

  • Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Private And Discrete

Private And Discrete

Aug 2, 2020

Did this article help you?

6 steps in research paper

Jan 3, 2018

Anonymous

Oct 29, 2016

Maronicha Lyles

Maronicha Lyles

Jul 24, 2016

Maxwell Ansah

Maxwell Ansah

Nov 22, 2019

Am I a Narcissist or an Empath Quiz

Featured Articles

Make Chicken Nuggets

Trending Articles

What is Golden Child Syndrome? 7 Signs You Were the Golden Child

Watch Articles

Wrap a Round Gift

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Info
  • Not Selling Info

Don’t miss out! Sign up for

wikiHow’s newsletter

Reference management. Clean and simple.

How to start your research paper [step-by-step guide]

6 steps in research paper

1. Choose your topic

2. find information on your topic, 3. create a thesis statement, 4. create a research paper outline, 5. organize your notes, 6. write your introduction, 7. write your first draft of the body, 9. write your conclusion, 10. revise again, edit, and proofread, frequently asked questions about starting your research paper, related articles.

Research papers can be short or in-depth, but no matter what type of research paper, they all follow pretty much the same pattern and have the same structure .

A research paper is a paper that makes an argument about a topic based on research and analysis.

There will be some basic differences, but if you can write one type of research paper, you can write another. Below is a step-by-step guide to starting and completing your research paper.

Choose a topic that interests you. Writing your research paper will be so much more pleasant with a topic that you actually want to know more about. Your interest will show in the way you write and effort you put into the paper. Consider these issues when coming up with a topic:

  • make sure your topic is not too broad
  • narrow it down if you're using terms that are too general

Academic search engines are a great source to find background information on your topic. Your institution's library will most likely provide access to plenty of online research databases. Take a look at our guide on how to efficiently search online databases for academic research to learn how to gather all the information needed on your topic.

Tip: If you’re struggling with finding research, consider meeting with an academic librarian to help you come up with more balanced keywords.

If you’re struggling to find a topic for your thesis, take a look at our guide on how to come up with a thesis topic .

The thesis statement is one of the most important elements of any piece of academic writing. It can be defined as a very brief statement of what the main point or central message of your paper is. Our thesis statement guide will help you write an excellent thesis statement.

In the next step, you need to create your research paper outline . The outline is the skeleton of your research paper. Simply start by writing down your thesis and the main ideas you wish to present. This will likely change as your research progresses; therefore, do not worry about being too specific in the early stages of writing your outline.

Then, fill out your outline with the following components:

  • the main ideas that you want to cover in the paper
  • the types of evidence that you will use to support your argument
  • quotes from secondary sources that you may want to use

Organizing all the information you have gathered according to your outline will help you later on in the writing process. Analyze your notes, check for accuracy, verify the information, and make sure you understand all the information you have gathered in a way that you can communicate your findings effectively.

Start with the introduction. It will set the direction of your paper and help you a lot as you write. Waiting to write it at the end can leave you with a poorly written setup to an otherwise well-written paper.

The body of your paper argues, explains or describes your topic. Start with the first topic from your outline. Ideally, you have organized your notes in a way that you can work through your research paper outline and have all the notes ready.

After your first draft, take some time to check the paper for content errors. Rearrange ideas, make changes and check if the order of your paragraphs makes sense. At this point, it is helpful to re-read the research paper guidelines and make sure you have followed the format requirements. You can also use free grammar and proof reading checkers such as Grammarly .

Tip: Consider reading your paper from back to front when you undertake your initial revision. This will help you ensure that your argument and organization are sound.

Write your conclusion last and avoid including any new information that has not already been presented in the body of the paper. Your conclusion should wrap up your paper and show that your research question has been answered.

Allow a few days to pass after you finished writing the final draft of your research paper, and then start making your final corrections. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill gives some great advice here on how to revise, edit, and proofread your paper.

Tip: Take a break from your paper before you start your final revisions. Then, you’ll be able to approach your paper with fresh eyes.

As part of your final revision, be sure to check that you’ve cited everything correctly and that you have a full bibliography. Use a reference manager like Paperpile to organize your research and to create accurate citations.

The first step to start writing a research paper is to choose a topic. Make sure your topic is not too broad; narrow it down if you're using terms that are too general.

The format of your research paper will vary depending on the journal you submit to. Make sure to check first which citation style does the journal follow, in order to format your paper accordingly. Check Getting started with your research paper outline to have an idea of what a research paper looks like.

The last step of your research paper should be proofreading. Allow a few days to pass after you finished writing the final draft of your research paper, and then start making your final corrections. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill gives some great advice here on how to revise, edit and proofread your paper.

There are plenty of software you can use to write a research paper. We recommend our own citation software, Paperpile , as well as grammar and proof reading checkers such as Grammarly .

6 steps in research paper

How to Write a Research Paper Outline In 7 Steps

Matt Ellis

A research paper outline is a supporting document that lists all the topics to include in a paper in the intended order, usually divided by paragraphs. The typical outline of a research paper also consists of other details like subtopics and evidential sources to help the writer stay organized. Some even have individual sentence topics and early ideas for phrasing. 

Want to know how to write a research paper outline? This guide explains step by step what to include and how to write one yourself, including research paper outline examples. 

Give your writing extra polish Grammarly helps you communicate confidently Write with Grammarly

What is a research paper outline? 

The outline is an integral part of how to write a research paper . The main purpose of a research paper outline is to structure the topics, data, and all other inclusions in the paper (like direct quotes) so you stay organized and don’t forget anything. 

Conventionally, writers compose outlines after choosing a thesis statement and sourcing research evidence, but before writing the first draft . Making structural changes is far more efficient in the outlining phase than after you write the first draft; you can remove certain topics early on without wasting time writing them and add new topics before the drafting phase so you can write everything all at once. 

The typical outline of a research paper is broken up into sections and paragraphs , listing each paragraph’s topic and the related evidence or data to include therein. The depth of detail can change depending on your writing style or the requirements of the paper, as we explain below. 

Are there different kinds of research paper outlines?

In short, you decide what details to include in your research paper outline, although the requirements of the assignment influence what’s necessary. For example, a basic college research paper outline for a one-page assignment might contain only a list of four or five paragraph topics, whereas a formal research paper for a scientific study might outline each sentence in all five parts of a research paper: introduction, review of literature, methods, results, and discussion. 

Research paper outlines can be one level, two level, and so on, depending on their intricacy. One-level outlines display just the section headings or main topics, while four-level outlines get very detailed with paragraph and sentence breakdowns. 

There are three popular formats for research paper outlines: alphanumeric , full sentence , and decimal . Below, we’ll explain the details of each and illustrate their differences with the research paper outline examples, focused on the same topic: “Michael Jordan vs. LeBron James: Who’s the Best Basketball Player?”

Alphanumeric research paper outline

Alphanumeric is the most common outline format—with main topics listed as Roman numerals, subtopics as capital letters, specific points for each subtopic as Arabic numerals, and further details for individual points as lowercase letters. 

You would write the information in quick blurbs—just a few words—instead of complete sentences. 

Alphanumeric research paper outline example

I.  Michael Jordan

A. Career Highlights

1. Six NBA Championships

a. Six NBA Finals MVP

2. US Olympics Basketball Team

a. 1984 Gold Medalist

b. 1992 Gold Medalist

3. Fourteen NBA All-Star Game selections

a. Three NBA All-Star Game MVP Awards

B. Achievements

1. Record-holder scoring average

a. Regular season (30.12 points per game)

b. Playoffs (33.45 points per game)

2. Other accolades

a. 1996 Space Jam

b. Owner of Charlotte Hornets

II. LeBron James

1. Four NBA Championships

a. Four NBA Finals MVP

a. 2008 Gold Medalist

b. 2012 Gold Medalist

3. Eighteen NBA All-Star Game selections

1. Philanthropy

a. LeBron James Family Foundation

b. Social activism

a. 2021 Space Jam

b. First player to accumulate $1 billion as an active player

III. Analysis and Discussion

A. Of course, Michael Jordan is better

Full-sentence research paper outline 

Full-sentence research paper outlines have the same organization as alphanumeric outlines—with main topics listed as Roman numerals, subtopics as capital letters, subtopic points as Arabic numerals, and details for each point as lowercase letters. 

However, the significant difference is that you would write the information in incomplete sentences instead of quick blurbs. The advantage is that your outline is more specific and easier to share with colleagues when working as a team. The disadvantage is that it takes a little longer to write. 

Full-sentence research paper outline example

I. Michael Jordan is often considered the greatest basketball player of all time.

A. Jordan’s career in basketball is full of accomplishments and accolades. 

1. During his career, Jordan won six NBA Championships.

a. Jordan was named NBA Finals MVP all six times he was eligible. 

2. Jordan twice played for the US Olympics Basketball Team. 

a. Jordan’s first Olympics was in 1984 when he won the gold medal.

b. Jordan won a second gold medal as part of the 1992 “Dream Team.” 

3. Jordan was selected to play in the NBA All-Star Game fourteen times.

a. Jordan won the NBA All-Star Game MVP Award three times. 

B. Jordan’s legacy encompasses achievements on and off the court.

1. Jordan still holds a couple of significant records in the NBA. 

a. Jordan holds the record for the highest average of points per game  during the regular season (30.12 points per game).

b. Jordan also holds the record for the highest average of points per  game in the playoffs (33.45 points per game).

2. Jordan has notable success even when not playing basketball. 

a. Jordan starred in the original 1996 film Space Jam.

b. Today, Jordan owns the Charlotte Hornets.

II. LeBron James is often considered Jordan’s strongest rival for the greatest basketball player. 

A. James’s career mimics, and in some cases surpasses, that of Jordan’s career. 

1. During his career, James won four NBA Championships. 

a. James was named NBA Finals MVP all four times he was eligible. 

2. Like Jordan, James twice played for the US Olympics Basketball Team. 

a. James won the 2008 gold medal as part of the US basketball team.

b. James won the gold medal again in 2012. 

3. James was selected to play in the NBA All-Star Game eighteen times. 

a. James won the NBA All-Star Game MVP Award three times. 

B. James has a rich life outside of basketball as well. 

1. More than Jordan, James is known for his philanthropic work. 

a. James started the LeBron James Family Foundation charity. 

b. James fearlessly took public stances on controversial social issues.

2. Aside from charity, James has a few other distinctions from his lifetime. 

a. James starred in the 2021 Space Jam remake. 

b. James is the first NBA player to accumulate $1 billion as a player.

III. Considering the highlights of both athletes’ careers, who is better? 

A. Of course, Michael Jordan is better. 

Decimal research paper outline 

Decimal research paper outlines forgo the alphanumeric system and instead use a system of numbers with increasing decimal points—with main topics listed as whole numbers (1 or 1.0), subtopics with one decimal point (1.1), points under a subtopic with two decimal points (1.1.1), and further details with three decimal points (1.1.1.1). 

Each new piece of information uses the subsequent number (1.1.1, 1.1.2, etc.), so you always know where you are in the outline. You would write the content for each line in quick blurbs, just like the original alphanumeric formal. 

Decimal research paper outlines are the most thorough but can get complicated. They’re recommended for writers who prefer technical precision or for lengthy outlines with many topics and subtopics. 

Decimal research paper outline example

1 Michael Jordan

1.1 Career Highlights

1.1.1. Six NBA Championships

1.1.2 US Olympics Basketball Team

1.1.3 Fourteen NBA All-Star Game selections

1.2 Achievements

1.2.1 Record-holder scoring average

1.2.2 Other accolades

2 LeBron James

2.1 Career Highlights

2.1.1 Four NBA Championships

2.1.2 US Olympics Basketball Team

2.1.3 Eighteen NBA All-Star Game selection

2.2 Achievements

2.2.1 Philanthropy

2.2.2 Other accolades

3 Analysis and Discussion

3.1 Of course, Michael Jordan is better 

7 steps to follow when outlining a research paper 

1   choose your thesis and gather sources.

Your outline is not the first step in writing a research paper. Before that, you first need to choose a thesis and then gather primary and secondary sources to back it up. 

Your thesis is essentially what the research paper is about. Your thesis is given to you in some assignments, but sometimes, as with independent research, you’ll have to develop one on your own. 

Once you’ve settled on a thesis, you’ll need evidence to support it. Collect all the relevant sources and data early on so that you know what to write about. Researching often reveals new aspects of your topic that you hadn’t known about before. It may dispel any misinterpretations you have—better to find out you’re wrong sooner rather than later. For help on how to cite your sources, use our free Citation Generator . 

Keep in mind that the outline is just one part of writing a research paper. If you want to read more advice, take a look at our full guide on how to write a research paper . 

2   Make a list of all the topics, subtopics, and points you want to cover

Go through your research and note each topic, subtopic, and supporting point. Be sure to keep related information together. Remember that everything you discuss in your paper should relate to your thesis, so omit anything that seems tangential. 

If you’ve highlighted any specific passages or quotes from your sources, feel free to include them too. They aren’t necessary for all research paper outlines, but they save you time when you’re in the middle of writing your first draft. 

3   Choose the best type of research paper outline for the assignment

Choose the type of research paper outline that best matches your topic, the assignment’s length, and the complexity of your paper. Simple papers only require simple outlines, but more advanced topics with lots of research can benefit from more detailed outlines. 

Consider whether you’re sharing your outline with other team members or whether you’re writing it solo. Likewise, consider the length and amount of topics. The decimal format can help organize long papers, but feel free to stick with alphanumeric if it makes you comfortable. 

4   Consider the structure and sequence of your topics

Before actually writing the research paper outline, think long and hard about the order in which you present your topics. What is the most logical sequence? What structure would communicate most clearly to your readers, who may be unfamiliar with these topics? 

Keep in mind that some topics only make sense if they come after other topics. Before presenting new findings or revelations, you may want to add background or contextual information first. All other factors being equal, a chronological sequence is often the most logical structure. 

5   Create the framework for your outline

Rather than writing your research paper outline entirely at once, start with just the framework. Try putting the main topics in order without yet including any subtopics or supporting points. 

Starting with the framework gives you a clear look at the backbone of your research paper. Now would be a good time to rearrange the order if there’s a problem or add a new topic if you find something is missing. It’s never too late to go back and conduct more research to flesh out the areas you feel are lacking. 

6 Add in more details

After you’re satisfied with the framework, go ahead and add the details. Most research paper outlines benefit from including the paragraph structure , so feel free to add lines about your topic sentence, development/support sentences, and conclusion for each paragraph. 

If you want to get meticulous, you can add a few notes about sentence structure . Be careful of getting too detailed, though—otherwise, you’re writing a first draft instead of an outline! 

7 Revise to improve structure

Finally, check your completed outline to see if there’s room for improvement. This is your last chance before you begin the first draft. 

Double-check that all your topics are presented in the optimal order for your reader. Also, look over your research notes again to see if you’ve forgotten anything. Once your outline is the way you want it, it’s time to begin writing your research paper. 

Research paper outline FAQs

What is a research paper outline.

A research paper outline is a supporting document that defines the structure of a research paper. The author creates the outline before the first draft to stay on track when writing . 

How is a research paper outline structured?

Research paper outlines are generally divided into sections, paragraphs, and individual sentences or points. The amount of detail in a research paper outline varies depending on the writer’s style, the assignment requirements, and the complexity of the topic. 

What are the different formats of research paper outlines?

Three popular formats for research paper outlines are alphanumeric , full sentence , and decimal .

6 steps in research paper

  • Warrior Stories
  • Campus Life
  • Improving Our World
  • Winona State News
  • WSU-Rochester
  • College of Business
  • Social Feed
  • President’s Insights

Wellness

How to Write a Research Paper in 6 Steps

by Elizabeth Meinders | Oct 28, 2014 | Admissions Blog | 0 comments

As a senior English major, I’ve written so many research papers that I’m not even fazed by them anymore.

Professor wants eight to 10 pages and at least 12 sources? Pssh—I’ve got this! But I wasn’t always this confident in my writing abilities.

When I was a freshman and looking at the assignment description for my first research paper, I didn’t quite know where to begin.

Lucky for you, though, I’m going to share with you the strategies I’ve learned over the years.

1. Start researching early

Despite its sketchy reputation, Wikipedia isn’t a bad place to begin. You can get general ideas from a Wikipedia page, but you’ll want to do your real research at the Krueger Library . In addition to thousands of books, students also have access to a ton of scholarly journals and online databases. JSTOR , Academic Search Premier and  ScienceDirect  are some of the more popular databases.

If the thought of diving into databases overwhelms you, ask a librarian for help. Each academic department has a librarian who’s an expert in that field and can help direct your research.

Researching is the longest step in the writing process, so give yourself plenty of time to find the right sources you need.

2. Outline, outline, outline

You might be able to write a reflection paper without a clear idea of where you’re heading, but that won’t work with a research paper.

You need to outline—whether it’s official with roman numerals or just a basic sketch—so you know how you’re getting from claim A to claim B and finally to conclusion C.

Develop a working thesis and map out your main points. Start picking out good quotes from your sources and file them under their respective topics. This will help you later when you turn this outline into full-fledged paragraphs.

3. Write your first draft

Now, it’s very easy to get swept up in all the research, but at some point you’ve got to pull your head out of the books and put your fingers to the keyboard. Carve out a good chunk of time and go at it.

Don’t worry about getting the transitions or spelling totally correct at this point. You just need to figure out what you’re even trying to say about your subject.

I usually give myself at least two or three hours because once I’m in the zone, I don’t want to stop until it’s done.

Pro tip: After expending all that brain power, take a nap or play a game on your phone to relax and recharge.

4. Revise, and revise again

This is NOT the step to check for proper use of commas and misspellings (that comes a bit later). Revising is taking those rough sentences you furiously typed into a Word doc and making them into coherent paragraphs with good sentence flow and an academic vocabulary.

Once you have each paragraph looking pretty good, take a look at your essay as whole.

  • Do you stick to your thesis throughout, or do you wander off-topic?
  • Do you have enough explanation about each main point, or is there an obvious hole in your argument?

Answering these types of big-picture questions honestly may mean that you have to re-write half your essay or go back to the library for yet another stack of sources, but this is why you started writing the paper early in the first place.

5. Double—no, triple—check your citations

You don’t want to get caught with plagiarism , even accidental plagiarism like forgetting to include the author’s name in a paraphrase.

Professors take this issue very seriously and most have a policy that if you plagiarize you’ll fail the course or even get dismissed from WSU .

The Purdue Online Writing Lab is a good resource for all things MLA, APA and CMS. If you’re going into a liberal arts field, do yourself a favor and purchase The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association or the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers , depending on your major. Not to be sacrilegious, but these books will be your Bible for the next few years.

6. Proofread carefully

Proofreading is an often overlooked step, usually because you’re pressed for time to simply finish, but it’s crucial if you want to avoid embarrassing mistakes like misspellings, dropped words, and misplaced commas.

Don’t rely on spellcheck to take care of it for you. You need to go through your paper line by line to make sure you catch those pesky “it’s” and “its” or “their” and “there” and “they’re”.

Pro tip: Read your paper out loud. This tends to make it obvious when the flow of a sentence is off or there’s punctuation missing. It may be weird at first, but just do it.

And there you have it. Those are the six steps to writing a research paper.

If you’re struggling at any point in this process, I encourage you to visit the Writing Center , a free tutoring service for writers at all skill levels and any writing assignment. These tutors are trained to help you work through the worst writer’s block and the trickiest of thesis troubles.

Trust me, I was once a writing tutor and have used the Writing Center myself on more than one occasion. Soon enough, you won’t feel like this anymore:

– Updated by Hailey Seipel, 08/25/2021

Submit a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Blog Archives

Receive notifications of new posts by email.

Email Address

Banner

Research Process: The Big 6

  • Step #1 : Task Definition
  • Step #2 : Information Seeking Strategies
  • Step #3 : Location and Access
  • Step #4 : Use of Information
  • Step #5 : Synthesis
  • Step #6 : Evaluation
  • Helpful Videos
  • How to Identify Resource Types
  • Database Tutorials (Videos)
  • What is Boolean Searching?
  • Evaluating Websites
  • Citing Sources
  • How to Avoid Plagiarism

6 steps in research paper

Check the pages above for each Step of the Big6 to get a further explanation of the process.

The “Big6™” is copyright © (1987) Michael B. Eisenberg and Robert E. Berkowitz. For more information, visit: www.big6.com

Overview of Big6 Process

Developed by Mike Eisenberg and Bob Berkowitz, the Big6 is the most widely known and widely used approach to teaching information and technology skills in the world. Used in thousands of K-12 schools, higher education institutions, and corporate and adult training programs, the Big6 information problem-solving model is applicable whenever people need and use information.

Big Six Steps

Following these steps will help you to focus and stay organized while doing your research. 1. Task Definition

  • Define your assignment & identify information needed to complete it.
  • Restate the assignment in your own words. What are you interested in learning?
  • Gather basic information about your topic by reading articles, web pages etc.
  • Talking with teachers/parents/librarians is also helpful.

2. Information Seeking Strategies

  • Make a list of all possible sources & select the best ones.
  • Choose from nonfiction, news articles, reference books, web pages, databases, ebooks and multimedia encyclopedias.

3. Location and Access

  • Locate sources & find information within the texts.
  • Consult the library catalog, library reference section, search engines, and web-based references
  • Use a graphic organizer to map out your topic and sub topics

4. Use of Information

  • Engage with your source: read, hear, view & extract the most valuable information
  • Use skimming and scanning to find information that addresses your topic.
  • Look for key words, pictures, read headlines and first & last paragraphs of articles to help find the “right” information.
  • Take notes – cite your source on your note card 
  • Summarize, paraphrase or quote.
  • Remember to cite each source you use. Use EasyBib

5. Synthesis

  • Choose the format of your project and organize your research notes according to how you will share the information.
  • If your format is a paper, begin by writing an outline.
  • If you are producing a PowerPoint or multi-media presentation, categorize your main bullet points and images. Different formats require different types of organization.
  • Present the information effectively by practicing and knowing your audience.

6. Evaluation

  • Judge the product (effectiveness). 
  • Judge the process (efficiency).
  • Did you meet your objective?
  • Judge the quality of your work.
  • Next, judge the quality of your presentation.
  • You can use criteria such as accuracy, content, creativity and legibility.

Big6 Mike Eisenberg and Bob Berkowitz.

  • << Previous: Home
  • Next: Step #1 : Task Definition >>
  • Last Updated: Nov 21, 2019 1:12 PM
  • URL: https://ashley.nhcs.libguides.com/researchprocess

EssayRuler

Just another WordPress site

6 Steps in Research Process: Write Your Research Paper the Right Way!

Research papers serve to show a student’s academic knowledge on the subject. If your assignment is to write a research paper, you should bear in mind some important facts. It will be an academic paper, so it will have to be written thoroughly, with deep knowledge on the topic. The studies you do before you start writing can be based on different scientific methods. You either look through trusted sources (articles, books, scientific journals, etc.) using the scientific research that already exists, or you do the experimental part and draw your results.

The content of your paper should be carefully structured. As it is a scientific paper, you will have to write it using special terminology and sticking to an academic style and proper formatting.

What is the research process? It is a systematic approach that uses scientific methods to answer an important question, explain or identify a research problem. There are several key steps of a basic scientific method:

  • Define the main question of the research, formulate a hypothesis;
  • Collect the information or observe;
  • Analyze data and the testing of the hypothesis;
  • Make conclusions;
  • Prove the hypothesis to be true or false based on the facts.

Before you start conducting research, choose and evaluate an interesting and meaningful topic for your paper. You have to be enthusiastic about it. Don’t make the topic too broad, focus on something more specific, on some aspect of the theme.

There are three types of academic papers: argumentative (if you contradict to something, or trying to persuade), analytical (if you analyze the information), expository (if you give an explanation to some phenomenon or a problem). When you write a thesis statement, it will have to coincide with the type of your paper.

#1. Identify the problem and develop a topic.

The first thing you need to do conducting research is to identify the problem. At first, you may formulate it as a question. Write down the main keywords for this question and you may use them in your search. The initially defined research problem should be later narrowed to a more precise one. This can be done by browsing academic sources and it is a necessary step. What you should do next is to choose a topic.

Your work will be more prolific and you will obtain background information more enthusiastically if the topic is of great interest to you. Find a topic that is in the sphere of your interest. When you choose a topic, make sure there is enough information on it. Look for background information and determine if there are a lot of materials on the topic. Search through books and electronic databases of your university or college library and find out if there are enough resources. If you cannot find a lot of cited academic sources, you should choose another topic.

#2.Review and evaluate the literature.

After you have chosen the topic, your purpose is to know about it as much as possible. This will allow you to evaluate the state of the scientific problem under the question, compare the data analyzed by different researchers, etc. Reviewing the literature will help you to know what research was done in the past, what scientific methods were used, what results and conclusions were made and how they may correlate with the topic of your paper.

When you read sources, you should remember that newer ones are more preferable than the old ones and expert opinion is more important than a general one. Scientific knowledge may change over time, that is a normal process depending on the development of research. Discoveries are made, new concepts are formulated, various data is collected. It determines the development of science and progress. That is why newer information is more valuable and credible, these sources indicate the modern development of knowledge in the given area.

#3. Make notes.

Look through the resources you have chosen, make necessary notes that you will need in your work. Document all the sources you consulted. Make sure you write down the publication information you will need later, for example, for your bibliography page. You will need the name of the author, the title, the date of publishing, publisher or the address of the webpage.

You should write down important examples, details, paraphrasing text or using quotes. Internet sources are not very reliable because their authority and quality differ, they may disappear before you are through with your paper. One more important thing. Don’t copy-paste into your paper directly like some of the students do, make sure you avoid plagiarism. Your work should be original and authentic, bring some input into the chosen field of science.

#4. Write your research paper.

Start writing your paper by structuring the data collected. You will need a good plan and writing is an important step in your work. A well-written outline helps you to organize your ideas before you get down to writing your draft. You will have to support your thesis by the plan, by its main points (headings and subheadings).

A typical research paper normally includes an introduction, a body, and a conclusion.

In the introduction, you state the purpose of your research paper. You point out the method you will deal with the material, will it be a comparison, an analysis of the problem or will it be written as a book review. Write why your paper should be interesting for your readers, maybe it will be useful for their education. In this part, you present the context and the background information for your paper.

At the end of the introduction, you can write a thesis. It may not be a requirement, though. Your thesis statement is the central idea of your study. The essence of your paper and the problem of it identified should be clearly formulated in it. In the introduction, you should write why the main idea of your paper is important.

Make sure that you exclude from your research paper any information or citations that don’t support your thesis. Stay focused on the central purpose of your paper and the analysis of the information.

When you write a rough draft, you write down your main ideas. Revise the draft several times and only after that, you can write the final draft.

The largest and the most voluminous part of your paper is the body. The writing strategy of you as a researcher here is to persuade the reader of your line of reasoning. This is a central part of your research paper and should be logically organized, the data analyzed should be structured. As it is the longest part of your written work, it is a nice idea to divide it into several parts using headings.

In conclusion, you summarize your research paper and dwell upon its main aim. Your conclusion may also consist of several parts:

  • Briefly rephrase your topic once more and remind why it is important. It should be written concisely and one sentence is usually enough for that;
  • Remind the reader of your thesis but rewrite it, so it doesn’t sound like in the introduction;
  • Summarize the key arguments, pointing out the most important arguments. Your ideas should be written in different words and you don’t have to prove your statements, just give a brief overview;
  • State the importance of your key points. Sometimes, though, it is better to explain it in the body;
  • It will be appropriate if you write about the importance of your research for the future of science and about the impact you made into the development of the subject.

#5. Cite the sources correctly.

When you cite sources, give credit where it is necessary. What is the citing of sources necessary for?

  • It gives credits to the authors of the material.
  • It allows other students who read your work to find these sources for their research.

If you don’t cite your sources, it may be called plagiarism and you should avoid it at all costs. You should use citations but adhere to the formatting.

If you write your research paper, you should use special academic formats when you cite your sources. One of the most popular citation formats is the APA (American Psychological Association) Style.

If you cite something in the body of your paper, include the last names of the authors and the year of the publication.”(Smith & Browd, 2014)”. For the APA style, you should use a special page titled Bibliography, where you list all the sources used in your paper. You will need to mention the last name of the author, the first initial, the year of the publication, the title. From time to time annotated bibliographies are used.

#6. Proofread and edit your paper.

Last but not least, some tips to proofread and edit your paper. Read the text attentively, check for errors (grammar, spelling, and punctuation should be correct). Make sure you use the correct language, associations, and synonyms and diversify the length of the sentences. The references should be properly formatted according to the APA style.

Pay attention to the content of the paper. It should be relevant to the topic; the language should be concise and accurate.

The paper overall should stick to the topic and your writing goal. The steps in the research process should be clearly defined. All the key points should be supported by adequate arguments.

The structure of the paper is of special importance. All the paragraphs should be arranged using a logical sequence. Each paragraph should have its idea. The meaning of every sentence should be clear.

Proofreading is the final part of editing. Content is the king, as they say, but your research paper should be error-free. Errors distract your reader from what you are saying. Editing and proofreading are separate processes. You do editing first and only then proofread the text. It is a very important task and may take a lot of time but it is worth it. You can also order proofreading services from a specialist over the Internet if you wish.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

  • Privacy Policy
  • SignUp/Login

Research Method

Home » Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Table of Contents

Research Process

Research Process

Definition:

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

Research Process Steps

Research Process Steps are as follows:

Identify the Research Question or Problem

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

Conduct a Literature Review

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

Formulate a Hypothesis or Research Objectives

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

Design a Research Plan and Methodology

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

Collect and Analyze Data

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

Interpret the Findings and Draw Conclusions

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

Communicate the Results

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

Review and Revise

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

Ethical Considerations

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

Dissemination and Application

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

Research Process Example

Following is a Research Process Example:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Applications of Research Process

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

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

Purpose of Research Process

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

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

Tips for Research Process

Here are some tips for the research process:

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

About the author

' src=

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Paper Conclusion

Research Paper Conclusion – Writing Guide and...

Appendices

Appendices – Writing Guide, Types and Examples

Research Report

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and...

Delimitations

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Scope of the Research

Scope of the Research – Writing Guide and...

Research Contribution

Research Contribution – Thesis Guide

  • Systematic review
  • Open access
  • Published: 19 February 2024

‘It depends’: what 86 systematic reviews tell us about what strategies to use to support the use of research in clinical practice

  • Annette Boaz   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0557-1294 1 ,
  • Juan Baeza 2 ,
  • Alec Fraser   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1121-1551 2 &
  • Erik Persson 3  

Implementation Science volume  19 , Article number:  15 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

2399 Accesses

71 Altmetric

Metrics details

The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of strategies have been developed to support the implementation of research into clinical practice. The objective of this study was to update and extend two previous reviews of systematic reviews of strategies designed to implement research evidence into clinical practice.

We developed a comprehensive systematic literature search strategy based on the terms used in the previous reviews to identify studies that looked explicitly at interventions designed to turn research evidence into practice. The search was performed in June 2022 in four electronic databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Epistemonikos. We searched from January 2010 up to June 2022 and applied no language restrictions. Two independent reviewers appraised the quality of included studies using a quality assessment checklist. To reduce the risk of bias, papers were excluded following discussion between all members of the team. Data were synthesised using descriptive and narrative techniques to identify themes and patterns linked to intervention strategies, targeted behaviours, study settings and study outcomes.

We identified 32 reviews conducted between 2010 and 2022. The reviews are mainly of multi-faceted interventions ( n  = 20) although there are reviews focusing on single strategies (ICT, educational, reminders, local opinion leaders, audit and feedback, social media and toolkits). The majority of reviews report strategies achieving small impacts (normally on processes of care). There is much less evidence that these strategies have shifted patient outcomes. Furthermore, a lot of nuance lies behind these headline findings, and this is increasingly commented upon in the reviews themselves.

Combined with the two previous reviews, 86 systematic reviews of strategies to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice have been identified. We need to shift the emphasis away from isolating individual and multi-faceted interventions to better understanding and building more situated, relational and organisational capability to support the use of research in clinical practice. This will involve drawing on a wider range of research perspectives (including social science) in primary studies and diversifying the types of synthesis undertaken to include approaches such as realist synthesis which facilitate exploration of the context in which strategies are employed.

Peer Review reports

Contribution to the literature

Considerable time and money is invested in implementing and evaluating strategies to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice.

The growing body of evidence is not providing the anticipated clear lessons to support improved implementation.

Instead what is needed is better understanding and building more situated, relational and organisational capability to support the use of research in clinical practice.

This would involve a more central role in implementation science for a wider range of perspectives, especially from the social, economic, political and behavioural sciences and for greater use of different types of synthesis, such as realist synthesis.

Introduction

The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of interventions has been developed to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice [ 1 , 2 ]. In recent years researchers have worked to improve the consistency in the ways in which these interventions (often called strategies) are described to support their evaluation. One notable development has been the emergence of Implementation Science as a field focusing explicitly on “the scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of research findings and other evidence-based practices into routine practice” ([ 3 ] p. 1). The work of implementation science focuses on closing, or at least narrowing, the gap between research and practice. One contribution has been to map existing interventions, identifying 73 discreet strategies to support research implementation [ 4 ] which have been grouped into 9 clusters [ 5 ]. The authors note that they have not considered the evidence of effectiveness of the individual strategies and that a next step is to understand better which strategies perform best in which combinations and for what purposes [ 4 ]. Other authors have noted that there is also scope to learn more from other related fields of study such as policy implementation [ 6 ] and to draw on methods designed to support the evaluation of complex interventions [ 7 ].

The increase in activity designed to support the implementation of research into practice and improvements in reporting provided the impetus for an update of a review of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of interventions designed to support the use of research in clinical practice [ 8 ] which was itself an update of the review conducted by Grimshaw and colleagues in 2001. The 2001 review [ 9 ] identified 41 reviews considering a range of strategies including educational interventions, audit and feedback, computerised decision support to financial incentives and combined interventions. The authors concluded that all the interventions had the potential to promote the uptake of evidence in practice, although no one intervention seemed to be more effective than the others in all settings. They concluded that combined interventions were more likely to be effective than single interventions. The 2011 review identified a further 13 systematic reviews containing 313 discrete primary studies. Consistent with the previous review, four main strategy types were identified: audit and feedback; computerised decision support; opinion leaders; and multi-faceted interventions (MFIs). Nine of the reviews reported on MFIs. The review highlighted the small effects of single interventions such as audit and feedback, computerised decision support and opinion leaders. MFIs claimed an improvement in effectiveness over single interventions, although effect sizes remained small to moderate and this improvement in effectiveness relating to MFIs has been questioned in a subsequent review [ 10 ]. In updating the review, we anticipated a larger pool of reviews and an opportunity to consolidate learning from more recent systematic reviews of interventions.

This review updates and extends our previous review of systematic reviews of interventions designed to implement research evidence into clinical practice. To identify potentially relevant peer-reviewed research papers, we developed a comprehensive systematic literature search strategy based on the terms used in the Grimshaw et al. [ 9 ] and Boaz, Baeza and Fraser [ 8 ] overview articles. To ensure optimal retrieval, our search strategy was refined with support from an expert university librarian, considering the ongoing improvements in the development of search filters for systematic reviews since our first review [ 11 ]. We also wanted to include technology-related terms (e.g. apps, algorithms, machine learning, artificial intelligence) to find studies that explored interventions based on the use of technological innovations as mechanistic tools for increasing the use of evidence into practice (see Additional file 1 : Appendix A for full search strategy).

The search was performed in June 2022 in the following electronic databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Epistemonikos. We searched for articles published since the 2011 review. We searched from January 2010 up to June 2022 and applied no language restrictions. Reference lists of relevant papers were also examined.

We uploaded the results using EPPI-Reviewer, a web-based tool that facilitated semi-automation of the screening process and removal of duplicate studies. We made particular use of a priority screening function to reduce screening workload and avoid ‘data deluge’ [ 12 ]. Through machine learning, one reviewer screened a smaller number of records ( n  = 1200) to train the software to predict whether a given record was more likely to be relevant or irrelevant, thus pulling the relevant studies towards the beginning of the screening process. This automation did not replace manual work but helped the reviewer to identify eligible studies more quickly. During the selection process, we included studies that looked explicitly at interventions designed to turn research evidence into practice. Studies were included if they met the following pre-determined inclusion criteria:

The study was a systematic review

Search terms were included

Focused on the implementation of research evidence into practice

The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed as part of the review

Study populations included healthcare providers and patients. The EPOC taxonomy [ 13 ] was used to categorise the strategies. The EPOC taxonomy has four domains: delivery arrangements, financial arrangements, governance arrangements and implementation strategies. The implementation strategies domain includes 20 strategies targeted at healthcare workers. Numerous EPOC strategies were assessed in the review including educational strategies, local opinion leaders, reminders, ICT-focused approaches and audit and feedback. Some strategies that did not fit easily within the EPOC categories were also included. These were social media strategies and toolkits, and multi-faceted interventions (MFIs) (see Table  2 ). Some systematic reviews included comparisons of different interventions while other reviews compared one type of intervention against a control group. Outcomes related to improvements in health care processes or patient well-being. Numerous individual study types (RCT, CCT, BA, ITS) were included within the systematic reviews.

We excluded papers that:

Focused on changing patient rather than provider behaviour

Had no demonstrable outcomes

Made unclear or no reference to research evidence

The last of these criteria was sometimes difficult to judge, and there was considerable discussion amongst the research team as to whether the link between research evidence and practice was sufficiently explicit in the interventions analysed. As we discussed in the previous review [ 8 ] in the field of healthcare, the principle of evidence-based practice is widely acknowledged and tools to change behaviour such as guidelines are often seen to be an implicit codification of evidence, despite the fact that this is not always the case.

Reviewers employed a two-stage process to select papers for inclusion. First, all titles and abstracts were screened by one reviewer to determine whether the study met the inclusion criteria. Two papers [ 14 , 15 ] were identified that fell just before the 2010 cut-off. As they were not identified in the searches for the first review [ 8 ] they were included and progressed to assessment. Each paper was rated as include, exclude or maybe. The full texts of 111 relevant papers were assessed independently by at least two authors. To reduce the risk of bias, papers were excluded following discussion between all members of the team. 32 papers met the inclusion criteria and proceeded to data extraction. The study selection procedure is documented in a PRISMA literature flow diagram (see Fig.  1 ). We were able to include French, Spanish and Portuguese papers in the selection reflecting the language skills in the study team, but none of the papers identified met the inclusion criteria. Other non- English language papers were excluded.

figure 1

PRISMA flow diagram. Source: authors

One reviewer extracted data on strategy type, number of included studies, local, target population, effectiveness and scope of impact from the included studies. Two reviewers then independently read each paper and noted key findings and broad themes of interest which were then discussed amongst the wider authorial team. Two independent reviewers appraised the quality of included studies using a Quality Assessment Checklist based on Oxman and Guyatt [ 16 ] and Francke et al. [ 17 ]. Each study was rated a quality score ranging from 1 (extensive flaws) to 7 (minimal flaws) (see Additional file 2 : Appendix B). All disagreements were resolved through discussion. Studies were not excluded in this updated overview based on methodological quality as we aimed to reflect the full extent of current research into this topic.

The extracted data were synthesised using descriptive and narrative techniques to identify themes and patterns in the data linked to intervention strategies, targeted behaviours, study settings and study outcomes.

Thirty-two studies were included in the systematic review. Table 1. provides a detailed overview of the included systematic reviews comprising reference, strategy type, quality score, number of included studies, local, target population, effectiveness and scope of impact (see Table  1. at the end of the manuscript). Overall, the quality of the studies was high. Twenty-three studies scored 7, six studies scored 6, one study scored 5, one study scored 4 and one study scored 3. The primary focus of the review was on reviews of effectiveness studies, but a small number of reviews did include data from a wider range of methods including qualitative studies which added to the analysis in the papers [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. The majority of reviews report strategies achieving small impacts (normally on processes of care). There is much less evidence that these strategies have shifted patient outcomes. In this section, we discuss the different EPOC-defined implementation strategies in turn. Interestingly, we found only two ‘new’ approaches in this review that did not fit into the existing EPOC approaches. These are a review focused on the use of social media and a review considering toolkits. In addition to single interventions, we also discuss multi-faceted interventions. These were the most common intervention approach overall. A summary is provided in Table  2 .

Educational strategies

The overview identified three systematic reviews focusing on educational strategies. Grudniewicz et al. [ 22 ] explored the effectiveness of printed educational materials on primary care physician knowledge, behaviour and patient outcomes and concluded they were not effective in any of these aspects. Koota, Kääriäinen and Melender [ 23 ] focused on educational interventions promoting evidence-based practice among emergency room/accident and emergency nurses and found that interventions involving face-to-face contact led to significant or highly significant effects on patient benefits and emergency nurses’ knowledge, skills and behaviour. Interventions using written self-directed learning materials also led to significant improvements in nurses’ knowledge of evidence-based practice. Although the quality of the studies was high, the review primarily included small studies with low response rates, and many of them relied on self-assessed outcomes; consequently, the strength of the evidence for these outcomes is modest. Wu et al. [ 20 ] questioned if educational interventions aimed at nurses to support the implementation of evidence-based practice improve patient outcomes. Although based on evaluation projects and qualitative data, their results also suggest that positive changes on patient outcomes can be made following the implementation of specific evidence-based approaches (or projects). The differing positive outcomes for educational strategies aimed at nurses might indicate that the target audience is important.

Local opinion leaders

Flodgren et al. [ 24 ] was the only systemic review focusing solely on opinion leaders. The review found that local opinion leaders alone, or in combination with other interventions, can be effective in promoting evidence‐based practice, but this varies both within and between studies and the effect on patient outcomes is uncertain. The review found that, overall, any intervention involving opinion leaders probably improves healthcare professionals’ compliance with evidence-based practice but varies within and across studies. However, how opinion leaders had an impact could not be determined because of insufficient details were provided, illustrating that reporting specific details in published studies is important if diffusion of effective methods of increasing evidence-based practice is to be spread across a system. The usefulness of this review is questionable because it cannot provide evidence of what is an effective opinion leader, whether teams of opinion leaders or a single opinion leader are most effective, or the most effective methods used by opinion leaders.

Pantoja et al. [ 26 ] was the only systemic review focusing solely on manually generated reminders delivered on paper included in the overview. The review explored how these affected professional practice and patient outcomes. The review concluded that manually generated reminders delivered on paper as a single intervention probably led to small to moderate increases in adherence to clinical recommendations, and they could be used as a single quality improvement intervention. However, the authors indicated that this intervention would make little or no difference to patient outcomes. The authors state that such a low-tech intervention may be useful in low- and middle-income countries where paper records are more likely to be the norm.

ICT-focused approaches

The three ICT-focused reviews [ 14 , 27 , 28 ] showed mixed results. Jamal, McKenzie and Clark [ 14 ] explored the impact of health information technology on the quality of medical and health care. They examined the impact of electronic health record, computerised provider order-entry, or decision support system. This showed a positive improvement in adherence to evidence-based guidelines but not to patient outcomes. The number of studies included in the review was low and so a conclusive recommendation could not be reached based on this review. Similarly, Brown et al. [ 28 ] found that technology-enabled knowledge translation interventions may improve knowledge of health professionals, but all eight studies raised concerns of bias. The De Angelis et al. [ 27 ] review was more promising, reporting that ICT can be a good way of disseminating clinical practice guidelines but conclude that it is unclear which type of ICT method is the most effective.

Audit and feedback

Sykes, McAnuff and Kolehmainen [ 29 ] examined whether audit and feedback were effective in dementia care and concluded that it remains unclear which ingredients of audit and feedback are successful as the reviewed papers illustrated large variations in the effectiveness of interventions using audit and feedback.

Non-EPOC listed strategies: social media, toolkits

There were two new (non-EPOC listed) intervention types identified in this review compared to the 2011 review — fewer than anticipated. We categorised a third — ‘care bundles’ [ 36 ] as a multi-faceted intervention due to its description in practice and a fourth — ‘Technology Enhanced Knowledge Transfer’ [ 28 ] was classified as an ICT-focused approach. The first new strategy was identified in Bhatt et al.’s [ 30 ] systematic review of the use of social media for the dissemination of clinical practice guidelines. They reported that the use of social media resulted in a significant improvement in knowledge and compliance with evidence-based guidelines compared with more traditional methods. They noted that a wide selection of different healthcare professionals and patients engaged with this type of social media and its global reach may be significant for low- and middle-income countries. This review was also noteworthy for developing a simple stepwise method for using social media for the dissemination of clinical practice guidelines. However, it is debatable whether social media can be classified as an intervention or just a different way of delivering an intervention. For example, the review discussed involving opinion leaders and patient advocates through social media. However, this was a small review that included only five studies, so further research in this new area is needed. Yamada et al. [ 31 ] draw on 39 studies to explore the application of toolkits, 18 of which had toolkits embedded within larger KT interventions, and 21 of which evaluated toolkits as standalone interventions. The individual component strategies of the toolkits were highly variable though the authors suggest that they align most closely with educational strategies. The authors conclude that toolkits as either standalone strategies or as part of MFIs hold some promise for facilitating evidence use in practice but caution that the quality of many of the primary studies included is considered weak limiting these findings.

Multi-faceted interventions

The majority of the systematic reviews ( n  = 20) reported on more than one intervention type. Some of these systematic reviews focus exclusively on multi-faceted interventions, whilst others compare different single or combined interventions aimed at achieving similar outcomes in particular settings. While these two approaches are often described in a similar way, they are actually quite distinct from each other as the former report how multiple strategies may be strategically combined in pursuance of an agreed goal, whilst the latter report how different strategies may be incidentally used in sometimes contrasting settings in the pursuance of similar goals. Ariyo et al. [ 35 ] helpfully summarise five key elements often found in effective MFI strategies in LMICs — but which may also be transferrable to HICs. First, effective MFIs encourage a multi-disciplinary approach acknowledging the roles played by different professional groups to collectively incorporate evidence-informed practice. Second, they utilise leadership drawing on a wide set of clinical and non-clinical actors including managers and even government officials. Third, multiple types of educational practices are utilised — including input from patients as stakeholders in some cases. Fourth, protocols, checklists and bundles are used — most effectively when local ownership is encouraged. Finally, most MFIs included an emphasis on monitoring and evaluation [ 35 ]. In contrast, other studies offer little information about the nature of the different MFI components of included studies which makes it difficult to extrapolate much learning from them in relation to why or how MFIs might affect practice (e.g. [ 28 , 38 ]). Ultimately, context matters, which some review authors argue makes it difficult to say with real certainty whether single or MFI strategies are superior (e.g. [ 21 , 27 ]). Taking all the systematic reviews together we may conclude that MFIs appear to be more likely to generate positive results than single interventions (e.g. [ 34 , 45 ]) though other reviews should make us cautious (e.g. [ 32 , 43 ]).

While multi-faceted interventions still seem to be more effective than single-strategy interventions, there were important distinctions between how the results of reviews of MFIs are interpreted in this review as compared to the previous reviews [ 8 , 9 ], reflecting greater nuance and debate in the literature. This was particularly noticeable where the effectiveness of MFIs was compared to single strategies, reflecting developments widely discussed in previous studies [ 10 ]. We found that most systematic reviews are bounded by their clinical, professional, spatial, system, or setting criteria and often seek to draw out implications for the implementation of evidence in their areas of specific interest (such as nursing or acute care). Frequently this means combining all relevant studies to explore the respective foci of each systematic review. Therefore, most reviews we categorised as MFIs actually include highly variable numbers and combinations of intervention strategies and highly heterogeneous original study designs. This makes statistical analyses of the type used by Squires et al. [ 10 ] on the three reviews in their paper not possible. Further, it also makes extrapolating findings and commenting on broad themes complex and difficult. This may suggest that future research should shift its focus from merely examining ‘what works’ to ‘what works where and what works for whom’ — perhaps pointing to the value of realist approaches to these complex review topics [ 48 , 49 ] and other more theory-informed approaches [ 50 ].

Some reviews have a relatively small number of studies (i.e. fewer than 10) and the authors are often understandably reluctant to engage with wider debates about the implications of their findings. Other larger studies do engage in deeper discussions about internal comparisons of findings across included studies and also contextualise these in wider debates. Some of the most informative studies (e.g. [ 35 , 40 ]) move beyond EPOC categories and contextualise MFIs within wider systems thinking and implementation theory. This distinction between MFIs and single interventions can actually be very useful as it offers lessons about the contexts in which individual interventions might have bounded effectiveness (i.e. educational interventions for individual change). Taken as a whole, this may also then help in terms of how and when to conjoin single interventions into effective MFIs.

In the two previous reviews, a consistent finding was that MFIs were more effective than single interventions [ 8 , 9 ]. However, like Squires et al. [ 10 ] this overview is more equivocal on this important issue. There are four points which may help account for the differences in findings in this regard. Firstly, the diversity of the systematic reviews in terms of clinical topic or setting is an important factor. Secondly, there is heterogeneity of the studies within the included systematic reviews themselves. Thirdly, there is a lack of consistency with regards to the definition and strategies included within of MFIs. Finally, there are epistemological differences across the papers and the reviews. This means that the results that are presented depend on the methods used to measure, report, and synthesise them. For instance, some reviews highlight that education strategies can be useful to improve provider understanding — but without wider organisational or system-level change, they may struggle to deliver sustained transformation [ 19 , 44 ].

It is also worth highlighting the importance of the theory of change underlying the different interventions. Where authors of the systematic reviews draw on theory, there is space to discuss/explain findings. We note a distinction between theoretical and atheoretical systematic review discussion sections. Atheoretical reviews tend to present acontextual findings (for instance, one study found very positive results for one intervention, and this gets highlighted in the abstract) whilst theoretically informed reviews attempt to contextualise and explain patterns within the included studies. Theory-informed systematic reviews seem more likely to offer more profound and useful insights (see [ 19 , 35 , 40 , 43 , 45 ]). We find that the most insightful systematic reviews of MFIs engage in theoretical generalisation — they attempt to go beyond the data of individual studies and discuss the wider implications of the findings of the studies within their reviews drawing on implementation theory. At the same time, they highlight the active role of context and the wider relational and system-wide issues linked to implementation. It is these types of investigations that can help providers further develop evidence-based practice.

This overview has identified a small, but insightful set of papers that interrogate and help theorise why, how, for whom, and in which circumstances it might be the case that MFIs are superior (see [ 19 , 35 , 40 ] once more). At the level of this overview — and in most of the systematic reviews included — it appears to be the case that MFIs struggle with the question of attribution. In addition, there are other important elements that are often unmeasured, or unreported (e.g. costs of the intervention — see [ 40 ]). Finally, the stronger systematic reviews [ 19 , 35 , 40 , 43 , 45 ] engage with systems issues, human agency and context [ 18 ] in a way that was not evident in the systematic reviews identified in the previous reviews [ 8 , 9 ]. The earlier reviews lacked any theory of change that might explain why MFIs might be more effective than single ones — whereas now some systematic reviews do this, which enables them to conclude that sometimes single interventions can still be more effective.

As Nilsen et al. ([ 6 ] p. 7) note ‘Study findings concerning the effectiveness of various approaches are continuously synthesized and assembled in systematic reviews’. We may have gone as far as we can in understanding the implementation of evidence through systematic reviews of single and multi-faceted interventions and the next step would be to conduct more research exploring the complex and situated nature of evidence used in clinical practice and by particular professional groups. This would further build on the nuanced discussion and conclusion sections in a subset of the papers we reviewed. This might also support the field to move away from isolating individual implementation strategies [ 6 ] to explore the complex processes involving a range of actors with differing capacities [ 51 ] working in diverse organisational cultures. Taxonomies of implementation strategies do not fully account for the complex process of implementation, which involves a range of different actors with different capacities and skills across multiple system levels. There is plenty of work to build on, particularly in the social sciences, which currently sits at the margins of debates about evidence implementation (see for example, Normalisation Process Theory [ 52 ]).

There are several changes that we have identified in this overview of systematic reviews in comparison to the review we published in 2011 [ 8 ]. A consistent and welcome finding is that the overall quality of the systematic reviews themselves appears to have improved between the two reviews, although this is not reflected upon in the papers. This is exhibited through better, clearer reporting mechanisms in relation to the mechanics of the reviews, alongside a greater attention to, and deeper description of, how potential biases in included papers are discussed. Additionally, there is an increased, but still limited, inclusion of original studies conducted in low- and middle-income countries as opposed to just high-income countries. Importantly, we found that many of these systematic reviews are attuned to, and comment upon the contextual distinctions of pursuing evidence-informed interventions in health care settings in different economic settings. Furthermore, systematic reviews included in this updated article cover a wider set of clinical specialities (both within and beyond hospital settings) and have a focus on a wider set of healthcare professions — discussing both similarities, differences and inter-professional challenges faced therein, compared to the earlier reviews. These wider ranges of studies highlight that a particular intervention or group of interventions may work well for one professional group but be ineffective for another. This diversity of study settings allows us to consider the important role context (in its many forms) plays on implementing evidence into practice. Examining the complex and varied context of health care will help us address what Nilsen et al. ([ 6 ] p. 1) described as, ‘society’s health problems [that] require research-based knowledge acted on by healthcare practitioners together with implementation of political measures from governmental agencies’. This will help us shift implementation science to move, ‘beyond a success or failure perspective towards improved analysis of variables that could explain the impact of the implementation process’ ([ 6 ] p. 2).

This review brings together 32 papers considering individual and multi-faceted interventions designed to support the use of evidence in clinical practice. The majority of reviews report strategies achieving small impacts (normally on processes of care). There is much less evidence that these strategies have shifted patient outcomes. Combined with the two previous reviews, 86 systematic reviews of strategies to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice have been conducted. As a whole, this substantial body of knowledge struggles to tell us more about the use of individual and MFIs than: ‘it depends’. To really move forwards in addressing the gap between research evidence and practice, we may need to shift the emphasis away from isolating individual and multi-faceted interventions to better understanding and building more situated, relational and organisational capability to support the use of research in clinical practice. This will involve drawing on a wider range of perspectives, especially from the social, economic, political and behavioural sciences in primary studies and diversifying the types of synthesis undertaken to include approaches such as realist synthesis which facilitate exploration of the context in which strategies are employed. Harvey et al. [ 53 ] suggest that when context is likely to be critical to implementation success there are a range of primary research approaches (participatory research, realist evaluation, developmental evaluation, ethnography, quality/ rapid cycle improvement) that are likely to be appropriate and insightful. While these approaches often form part of implementation studies in the form of process evaluations, they are usually relatively small scale in relation to implementation research as a whole. As a result, the findings often do not make it into the subsequent systematic reviews. This review provides further evidence that we need to bring qualitative approaches in from the periphery to play a central role in many implementation studies and subsequent evidence syntheses. It would be helpful for systematic reviews, at the very least, to include more detail about the interventions and their implementation in terms of how and why they worked.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Before and after study

Controlled clinical trial

Effective Practice and Organisation of Care

High-income countries

Information and Communications Technology

Interrupted time series

Knowledge translation

Low- and middle-income countries

Randomised controlled trial

Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet. 2003;362:1225–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Green LA, Seifert CM. Translation of research into practice: why we can’t “just do it.” J Am Board Fam Pract. 2005;18:541–5. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.18.6.541 .

Eccles MP, Mittman BS. Welcome to Implementation Science. Implement Sci. 2006;1:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-1-1 .

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Powell BJ, Waltz TJ, Chinman MJ, Damschroder LJ, Smith JL, Matthieu MM, et al. A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Implement Sci. 2015;10:2–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Matthieu MM, Damschroder LJ, et al. Use of concept mapping to characterize relationships among implementation strategies and assess their feasibility and importance: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) study. Implement Sci. 2015;10:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0295-0 .

Nilsen P, Ståhl C, Roback K, et al. Never the twain shall meet? - a comparison of implementation science and policy implementation research. Implementation Sci. 2013;8:2–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-63 .

Rycroft-Malone J, Seers K, Eldh AC, et al. A realist process evaluation within the Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence (FIRE) cluster randomised controlled international trial: an exemplar. Implementation Sci. 2018;13:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0811-0 .

Boaz A, Baeza J, Fraser A, European Implementation Score Collaborative Group (EIS). Effective implementation of research into practice: an overview of systematic reviews of the health literature. BMC Res Notes. 2011;4:212. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-4-212 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Grimshaw JM, Shirran L, Thomas R, Mowatt G, Fraser C, Bero L, et al. Changing provider behavior – an overview of systematic reviews of interventions. Med Care. 2001;39 8Suppl 2:II2–45.

Google Scholar  

Squires JE, Sullivan K, Eccles MP, et al. Are multifaceted interventions more effective than single-component interventions in changing health-care professionals’ behaviours? An overview of systematic reviews. Implement Sci. 2014;9:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0152-6 .

Salvador-Oliván JA, Marco-Cuenca G, Arquero-Avilés R. Development of an efficient search filter to retrieve systematic reviews from PubMed. J Med Libr Assoc. 2021;109:561–74. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2021.1223 .

Thomas JM. Diffusion of innovation in systematic review methodology: why is study selection not yet assisted by automation? OA Evid Based Med. 2013;1:1–6.

Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC). The EPOC taxonomy of health systems interventions. EPOC Resources for review authors. Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services; 2016. epoc.cochrane.org/epoc-taxonomy . Accessed 9 Oct 2023.

Jamal A, McKenzie K, Clark M. The impact of health information technology on the quality of medical and health care: a systematic review. Health Inf Manag. 2009;38:26–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/183335830903800305 .

Menon A, Korner-Bitensky N, Kastner M, et al. Strategies for rehabilitation professionals to move evidence-based knowledge into practice: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41:1024–32. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0451 .

Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:1271–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(91)90160-b .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Francke AL, Smit MC, de Veer AJ, et al. Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals: a systematic meta-review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008;8:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-8-38 .

Jones CA, Roop SC, Pohar SL, et al. Translating knowledge in rehabilitation: systematic review. Phys Ther. 2015;95:663–77. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20130512 .

Scott D, Albrecht L, O’Leary K, Ball GDC, et al. Systematic review of knowledge translation strategies in the allied health professions. Implement Sci. 2012;7:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-70 .

Wu Y, Brettle A, Zhou C, Ou J, et al. Do educational interventions aimed at nurses to support the implementation of evidence-based practice improve patient outcomes? A systematic review. Nurse Educ Today. 2018;70:109–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.08.026 .

Yost J, Ganann R, Thompson D, Aloweni F, et al. The effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions for promoting evidence-informed decision-making among nurses in tertiary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Implement Sci. 2015;10:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0286-1 .

Grudniewicz A, Kealy R, Rodseth RN, Hamid J, et al. What is the effectiveness of printed educational materials on primary care physician knowledge, behaviour, and patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Implement Sci. 2015;10:2–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0347-5 .

Koota E, Kääriäinen M, Melender HL. Educational interventions promoting evidence-based practice among emergency nurses: a systematic review. Int Emerg Nurs. 2018;41:51–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ienj.2018.06.004 .

Flodgren G, O’Brien MA, Parmelli E, et al. Local opinion leaders: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000125.pub5 .

Arditi C, Rège-Walther M, Durieux P, et al. Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001175.pub4 .

Pantoja T, Grimshaw JM, Colomer N, et al. Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper: effects on professional practice and patient outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001174.pub4 .

De Angelis G, Davies B, King J, McEwan J, et al. Information and communication technologies for the dissemination of clinical practice guidelines to health professionals: a systematic review. JMIR Med Educ. 2016;2:e16. https://doi.org/10.2196/mededu.6288 .

Brown A, Barnes C, Byaruhanga J, McLaughlin M, et al. Effectiveness of technology-enabled knowledge translation strategies in improving the use of research in public health: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22:e17274. https://doi.org/10.2196/17274 .

Sykes MJ, McAnuff J, Kolehmainen N. When is audit and feedback effective in dementia care? A systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018;79:27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.10.013 .

Bhatt NR, Czarniecki SW, Borgmann H, et al. A systematic review of the use of social media for dissemination of clinical practice guidelines. Eur Urol Focus. 2021;7:1195–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2020.10.008 .

Yamada J, Shorkey A, Barwick M, Widger K, et al. The effectiveness of toolkits as knowledge translation strategies for integrating evidence into clinical care: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e006808. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006808 .

Afari-Asiedu S, Abdulai MA, Tostmann A, et al. Interventions to improve dispensing of antibiotics at the community level in low and middle income countries: a systematic review. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2022;29:259–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgar.2022.03.009 .

Boonacker CW, Hoes AW, Dikhoff MJ, Schilder AG, et al. Interventions in health care professionals to improve treatment in children with upper respiratory tract infections. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2010;74:1113–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2010.07.008 .

Al Zoubi FM, Menon A, Mayo NE, et al. The effectiveness of interventions designed to increase the uptake of clinical practice guidelines and best practices among musculoskeletal professionals: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18:2–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3253-0 .

Ariyo P, Zayed B, Riese V, Anton B, et al. Implementation strategies to reduce surgical site infections: a systematic review. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2019;3:287–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2018.355 .

Borgert MJ, Goossens A, Dongelmans DA. What are effective strategies for the implementation of care bundles on ICUs: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2015;10:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0306-1 .

Cahill LS, Carey LM, Lannin NA, et al. Implementation interventions to promote the uptake of evidence-based practices in stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012575.pub2 .

Pedersen ER, Rubenstein L, Kandrack R, Danz M, et al. Elusive search for effective provider interventions: a systematic review of provider interventions to increase adherence to evidence-based treatment for depression. Implement Sci. 2018;13:1–30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0788-8 .

Jenkins HJ, Hancock MJ, French SD, Maher CG, et al. Effectiveness of interventions designed to reduce the use of imaging for low-back pain: a systematic review. CMAJ. 2015;187:401–8. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.141183 .

Bennett S, Laver K, MacAndrew M, Beattie E, et al. Implementation of evidence-based, non-pharmacological interventions addressing behavior and psychological symptoms of dementia: a systematic review focused on implementation strategies. Int Psychogeriatr. 2021;33:947–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610220001702 .

Noonan VK, Wolfe DL, Thorogood NP, et al. Knowledge translation and implementation in spinal cord injury: a systematic review. Spinal Cord. 2014;52:578–87. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2014.62 .

Albrecht L, Archibald M, Snelgrove-Clarke E, et al. Systematic review of knowledge translation strategies to promote research uptake in child health settings. J Pediatr Nurs. 2016;31:235–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2015.12.002 .

Campbell A, Louie-Poon S, Slater L, et al. Knowledge translation strategies used by healthcare professionals in child health settings: an updated systematic review. J Pediatr Nurs. 2019;47:114–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2019.04.026 .

Bird ML, Miller T, Connell LA, et al. Moving stroke rehabilitation evidence into practice: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Clin Rehabil. 2019;33:1586–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215519847253 .

Goorts K, Dizon J, Milanese S. The effectiveness of implementation strategies for promoting evidence informed interventions in allied healthcare: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06190-0 .

Zadro JR, O’Keeffe M, Allison JL, Lembke KA, et al. Effectiveness of implementation strategies to improve adherence of physical therapist treatment choices to clinical practice guidelines for musculoskeletal conditions: systematic review. Phys Ther. 2020;100:1516–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzaa101 .

Van der Veer SN, Jager KJ, Nache AM, et al. Translating knowledge on best practice into improving quality of RRT care: a systematic review of implementation strategies. Kidney Int. 2011;80:1021–34. https://doi.org/10.1038/ki.2011.222 .

Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, et al. Realist review–a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10Suppl 1:21–34. https://doi.org/10.1258/1355819054308530 .

Rycroft-Malone J, McCormack B, Hutchinson AM, et al. Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research. Implementation Sci. 2012;7:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-33 .

Johnson MJ, May CR. Promoting professional behaviour change in healthcare: what interventions work, and why? A theory-led overview of systematic reviews. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e008592. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008592 .

Metz A, Jensen T, Farley A, Boaz A, et al. Is implementation research out of step with implementation practice? Pathways to effective implementation support over the last decade. Implement Res Pract. 2022;3:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895221105585 .

May CR, Finch TL, Cornford J, Exley C, et al. Integrating telecare for chronic disease management in the community: What needs to be done? BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-131 .

Harvey G, Rycroft-Malone J, Seers K, Wilson P, et al. Connecting the science and practice of implementation – applying the lens of context to inform study design in implementation research. Front Health Serv. 2023;3:1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2023.1162762 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Professor Kathryn Oliver for her support in the planning the review, Professor Steve Hanney for reading and commenting on the final manuscript and the staff at LSHTM library for their support in planning and conducting the literature search.

This study was supported by LSHTM’s Research England QR strategic priorities funding allocation and the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration South London (NIHR ARC South London) at King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. Grant number NIHR200152. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or Research England.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Health and Social Care Workforce Research Unit, The Policy Institute, King’s College London, Virginia Woolf Building, 22 Kingsway, London, WC2B 6LE, UK

Annette Boaz

King’s Business School, King’s College London, 30 Aldwych, London, WC2B 4BG, UK

Juan Baeza & Alec Fraser

Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Campus Universitário Reitor João Davi Ferreira Lima, Florianópolis, SC, 88.040-900, Brazil

Erik Persson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

AB led the conceptual development and structure of the manuscript. EP conducted the searches and data extraction. All authors contributed to screening and quality appraisal. EP and AF wrote the first draft of the methods section. AB, JB and AF performed result synthesis and contributed to the analyses. AB wrote the first draft of the manuscript and incorporated feedback and revisions from all other authors. All authors revised and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annette Boaz .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: appendix a., additional file 2: appendix b., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Boaz, A., Baeza, J., Fraser, A. et al. ‘It depends’: what 86 systematic reviews tell us about what strategies to use to support the use of research in clinical practice. Implementation Sci 19 , 15 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01337-z

Download citation

Received : 01 November 2023

Accepted : 05 January 2024

Published : 19 February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01337-z

Share this article

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

  • Implementation
  • Interventions
  • Clinical practice
  • Research evidence
  • Multi-faceted

Implementation Science

ISSN: 1748-5908

  • Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
  • General enquiries: [email protected]

6 steps in research paper

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

  • Knowledge Base

Methodology

  • How to Do Thematic Analysis | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

How to Do Thematic Analysis | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Published on September 6, 2019 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Thematic analysis is a method of analyzing qualitative data . It is usually applied to a set of texts, such as an interview or transcripts . The researcher closely examines the data to identify common themes – topics, ideas and patterns of meaning that come up repeatedly.

There are various approaches to conducting thematic analysis, but the most common form follows a six-step process: familiarization, coding, generating themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and writing up. Following this process can also help you avoid confirmation bias when formulating your analysis.

This process was originally developed for psychology research by Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke . However, thematic analysis is a flexible method that can be adapted to many different kinds of research.

Table of contents

When to use thematic analysis, different approaches to thematic analysis, step 1: familiarization, step 2: coding, step 3: generating themes, step 4: reviewing themes, step 5: defining and naming themes, step 6: writing up, other interesting articles.

Thematic analysis is a good approach to research where you’re trying to find out something about people’s views, opinions, knowledge, experiences or values from a set of qualitative data – for example, interview transcripts , social media profiles, or survey responses .

Some types of research questions you might use thematic analysis to answer:

  • How do patients perceive doctors in a hospital setting?
  • What are young women’s experiences on dating sites?
  • What are non-experts’ ideas and opinions about climate change?
  • How is gender constructed in high school history teaching?

To answer any of these questions, you would collect data from a group of relevant participants and then analyze it. Thematic analysis allows you a lot of flexibility in interpreting the data, and allows you to approach large data sets more easily by sorting them into broad themes.

However, it also involves the risk of missing nuances in the data. Thematic analysis is often quite subjective and relies on the researcher’s judgement, so you have to reflect carefully on your own choices and interpretations.

Pay close attention to the data to ensure that you’re not picking up on things that are not there – or obscuring things that are.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Once you’ve decided to use thematic analysis, there are different approaches to consider.

There’s the distinction between inductive and deductive approaches:

  • An inductive approach involves allowing the data to determine your themes.
  • A deductive approach involves coming to the data with some preconceived themes you expect to find reflected there, based on theory or existing knowledge.

Ask yourself: Does my theoretical framework give me a strong idea of what kind of themes I expect to find in the data (deductive), or am I planning to develop my own framework based on what I find (inductive)?

There’s also the distinction between a semantic and a latent approach:

  • A semantic approach involves analyzing the explicit content of the data.
  • A latent approach involves reading into the subtext and assumptions underlying the data.

Ask yourself: Am I interested in people’s stated opinions (semantic) or in what their statements reveal about their assumptions and social context (latent)?

After you’ve decided thematic analysis is the right method for analyzing your data, and you’ve thought about the approach you’re going to take, you can follow the six steps developed by Braun and Clarke .

The first step is to get to know our data. It’s important to get a thorough overview of all the data we collected before we start analyzing individual items.

This might involve transcribing audio , reading through the text and taking initial notes, and generally looking through the data to get familiar with it.

Next up, we need to code the data. Coding means highlighting sections of our text – usually phrases or sentences – and coming up with shorthand labels or “codes” to describe their content.

Let’s take a short example text. Say we’re researching perceptions of climate change among conservative voters aged 50 and up, and we have collected data through a series of interviews. An extract from one interview looks like this:

In this extract, we’ve highlighted various phrases in different colors corresponding to different codes. Each code describes the idea or feeling expressed in that part of the text.

At this stage, we want to be thorough: we go through the transcript of every interview and highlight everything that jumps out as relevant or potentially interesting. As well as highlighting all the phrases and sentences that match these codes, we can keep adding new codes as we go through the text.

After we’ve been through the text, we collate together all the data into groups identified by code. These codes allow us to gain a a condensed overview of the main points and common meanings that recur throughout the data.

Next, we look over the codes we’ve created, identify patterns among them, and start coming up with themes.

Themes are generally broader than codes. Most of the time, you’ll combine several codes into a single theme. In our example, we might start combining codes into themes like this:

At this stage, we might decide that some of our codes are too vague or not relevant enough (for example, because they don’t appear very often in the data), so they can be discarded.

Other codes might become themes in their own right. In our example, we decided that the code “uncertainty” made sense as a theme, with some other codes incorporated into it.

Again, what we decide will vary according to what we’re trying to find out. We want to create potential themes that tell us something helpful about the data for our purposes.

Now we have to make sure that our themes are useful and accurate representations of the data. Here, we return to the data set and compare our themes against it. Are we missing anything? Are these themes really present in the data? What can we change to make our themes work better?

If we encounter problems with our themes, we might split them up, combine them, discard them or create new ones: whatever makes them more useful and accurate.

For example, we might decide upon looking through the data that “changing terminology” fits better under the “uncertainty” theme than under “distrust of experts,” since the data labelled with this code involves confusion, not necessarily distrust.

Now that you have a final list of themes, it’s time to name and define each of them.

Defining themes involves formulating exactly what we mean by each theme and figuring out how it helps us understand the data.

Naming themes involves coming up with a succinct and easily understandable name for each theme.

For example, we might look at “distrust of experts” and determine exactly who we mean by “experts” in this theme. We might decide that a better name for the theme is “distrust of authority” or “conspiracy thinking”.

Finally, we’ll write up our analysis of the data. Like all academic texts, writing up a thematic analysis requires an introduction to establish our research question, aims and approach.

We should also include a methodology section, describing how we collected the data (e.g. through semi-structured interviews or open-ended survey questions ) and explaining how we conducted the thematic analysis itself.

The results or findings section usually addresses each theme in turn. We describe how often the themes come up and what they mean, including examples from the data as evidence. Finally, our conclusion explains the main takeaways and shows how the analysis has answered our research question.

In our example, we might argue that conspiracy thinking about climate change is widespread among older conservative voters, point out the uncertainty with which many voters view the issue, and discuss the role of misinformation in respondents’ perceptions.

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

  • Normal distribution
  • Measures of central tendency
  • Chi square tests
  • Confidence interval
  • Quartiles & Quantiles
  • Cluster sampling
  • Stratified sampling
  • Discourse analysis
  • Cohort study
  • Peer review
  • Ethnography

Research bias

  • Implicit bias
  • Cognitive bias
  • Conformity bias
  • Hawthorne effect
  • Availability heuristic
  • Attrition bias
  • Social desirability bias

Cite this Scribbr article

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

Caulfield, J. (2023, June 22). How to Do Thematic Analysis | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved February 27, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/thematic-analysis/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, what is qualitative research | methods & examples, inductive vs. deductive research approach | steps & examples, critical discourse analysis | definition, guide & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

IMAGES

  1. Best Steps to Write a Research Paper in College/University

    6 steps in research paper

  2. Steps In Doing Research Paper , Basic Steps in the Research Process

    6 steps in research paper

  3. How to Write a Research Paper

    6 steps in research paper

  4. Writing Good Research Paper

    6 steps in research paper

  5. The Best Way to Write a Research Paper Fast in 7 Simple Steps

    6 steps in research paper

  6. Steps in doing research paper. How to Write a Research Paper Step by

    6 steps in research paper

VIDEO

  1. How to access and download paid research papers for free (all steps)?

  2. #12 🔴 UP POLICE 👮‍♂️& SSC GD 2024 || BEST 51 QUESTIONS by Aditya Ranjan Sir #uppolice #maths #shorts

  3. Stable Diffusion AnimateLCM Speed Up AI Animation Generate Process (Tutorial Guide)

  4. Fossil Jacketing Step-by-Step #digging #dinosaur #fossil #paleontology #science #biology

  5. 20 February science viral question 2024

COMMENTS

  1. How to Write a Research Paper

    Develop a thesis statement Create a research paper outline Write a first draft of the research paper Write the introduction Write a compelling body of text Write the conclusion The second draft The revision process Research paper checklist Free lecture slides Understand the assignment

  2. PDF 6 Simple Steps for Writing a Research Paper

    Step 1: Understand the Assignment and Set a Schedule One of the biggest problems students have when beginning a research paper is that they don't understand the assignment. Make sure that if you have any questions you ask the professor, other students, or come into the Writing Center. Some specific details you should know are:

  3. A Beginner's Guide to Starting the Research Process

    Step 1: Choose your topic First you have to come up with some ideas. Your thesis or dissertation topic can start out very broad.

  4. Basic Steps in the Research Process

    Step 1: Identify and develop your topic Selecting a topic can be the most challenging part of a research assignment. Since this is the very first step in writing a paper, it is vital that it be done correctly. Here are some tips for selecting a topic: Select a topic within the parameters set by the assignment.

  5. Write a Research Paper in Six Steps

    Welcome to the Writing LibGuide! Welcome to the research guide with step-by-step instructions on how to write a research paper. The following sections will guide you through the writing process and with finding articles, books, and eBooks for your research paper assignments.

  6. How to Write a Research Paper: A Step-By-Step Guide

    1 Understand the assignment For some of you this goes without saying, but you might be surprised at how many students start a research paper without even reading the assignment guidelines. So your first step should be to review the assignment and carefully read the writing prompt.

  7. How to Write a Research Paper

    Original research paper Rapid communication or letter Review article Case study Meeting abstract, paper, and proceedings Original research paper This is a full report written by researchers covering the analysis of their experimental study from start to finish. It is the most common type research manuscript that is published in academic journals.

  8. How to Write a Research Paper in 6 Steps

    1. Choose a Research Topic. The first step in your research odyssey is finding the right topic, which is actually just a question that you want to answer. You can start by reading up on a general topic that interests you. As you read, take notes and bookmark anything that strikes you.

  9. How to Write a Research Paper: 12 Steps (with Pictures)

    1 Focus your research on a narrow topic. As you conduct research, try to make your paper's subject more and more narrow. You can't defend an argument about a super broad subject. However, the more refined your topic, the easier it'll be to pose a clear argument and defend it with well-researched evidence.

  10. PDF Recipe for Research: A Six-Step Process

    1. An analytical paper breaks down an issue and evaluates it. 2. An expository paper teaches or illuminates a point. 3. A persuasive (or argumentative) paper makes a claim and backs it up with

  11. How to start your research paper [step-by-step guide]

    7. Write your first draft of the body. The body of your paper argues, explains or describes your topic. Start with the first topic from your outline. Ideally, you have organized your notes in a way that you can work through your research paper outline and have all the notes ready. 8.

  12. How to Write a Research Paper: A Step by Step Writing Guide

    Sentence and word structure. Adverbs. Adjectives. Idioms. Nouns and Pronouns. Verbs. Parts of speech. Writing a research paper is made easy with our 7 step guide. Learn how to organize your thoughts, conduct research, and write a compelling research paper.

  13. How to Write a Research Paper Step by Step

    1. Decide on a topic The person assigning the paper might also assign a topic. If you have a choice, choose a topic that interests you the most. Try choosing a topic with an abundance of research already completed. This makes the research process less complicated since you'll have the information required to make a clear and convincing argument. 2.

  14. Research Paper

    Literature Review 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.

  15. How to Write a Research Paper Outline In 7 Steps

    2 Make a list of all the topics, subtopics, and points you want to cover. Go through your research and note each topic, subtopic, and supporting point. Be sure to keep related information together. Remember that everything you discuss in your paper should relate to your thesis, so omit anything that seems tangential.

  16. How to Write a Research Paper in 6 Steps

    3. Write your first draft. Now, it's very easy to get swept up in all the research, but at some point you've got to pull your head out of the books and put your fingers to the keyboard. Carve out a good chunk of time and go at it. Don't worry about getting the transitions or spelling totally correct at this point.

  17. The Big 6

    Big Six Steps. Following these steps will help you to focus and stay organized while doing your research. 1. Task Definition. Define your assignment & identify information needed to complete it. Restate the assignment in your own words. What are you interested in learning? Gather basic information about your topic by reading articles, web pages ...

  18. 6 Steps in Research Process: Write Your Research Paper the Right Way

    #1. Identify the problem and develop a topic. The first thing you need to do conducting research is to identify the problem. At first, you may formulate it as a question. Write down the main keywords for this question and you may use them in your search. The initially defined research problem should be later narrowed to a more precise one.

  19. How to Create a Structured Research Paper Outline

    How to write a research paper outline. Follow these steps to start your research paper outline: Decide on the subject of the paper. Write down all the ideas you want to include or discuss. Organize related ideas into sub-groups.

  20. Research Process

    Research Process Steps are as follows: Identify the Research Question or Problem This is the first step in the research process. It involves identifying a problem or question that needs to be addressed. The research question should be specific, relevant, and focused on a particular area of interest. Conduct a Literature Review

  21. PDF Strategies for Essay Writing

    When you receive a paper assignment, your first step should be to read the assignment prompt carefully to make sure you understand what you are being asked to do. ... In a short paper—even a research paper—you don't need to provide an exhaustive summary as part of your conclusion. But you do need to make some kind of transition

  22. A Step-by-Step Process of Thematic Analysis to Develop a Conceptual

    By providing a methodological roadmap, this study enhances the rigor and replicability of thematic analysis and offers a comprehensive strategy for theoretical conceptualization in qualitative research. The contribution of this paper is a systematic six-step thematic analysis process that leads to the development of a conceptual model; each ...

  23. 'It depends': what 86 systematic reviews tell us about what strategies

    The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of interventions has been developed to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice [1, 2].In recent years researchers have worked to improve the consistency in the ways in which these interventions (often called strategies) are described to support their evaluation.

  24. How to Do Thematic Analysis

    How to Do Thematic Analysis | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. Published on September 6, 2019 by Jack Caulfield.Revised on June 22, 2023. Thematic analysis is a method of analyzing qualitative data.It is usually applied to a set of texts, such as an interview or transcripts.The researcher closely examines the data to identify common themes - topics, ideas and patterns of meaning that come up ...