research questions in dissertations

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Write a Good Research Question (w/ Examples)

What is a Research Question?

A research question is the main question that your study sought or is seeking to answer. A clear research question guides your research paper or thesis and states exactly what you want to find out, giving your work a focus and objective. Learning  how to write a hypothesis or research question is the start to composing any thesis, dissertation, or research paper. It is also one of the most important sections of a research proposal . 

A good research question not only clarifies the writing in your study; it provides your readers with a clear focus and facilitates their understanding of your research topic, as well as outlining your study’s objectives. Before drafting the paper and receiving research paper editing (and usually before performing your study), you should write a concise statement of what this study intends to accomplish or reveal.

Research Question Writing Tips

Listed below are the important characteristics of a good research question:

A good research question should:

• Be clear and provide specific information so readers can easily understand the purpose.
• Be focused in its scope and narrow enough to be addressed in the space allowed by your paper
• Be relevant and concise and express your main ideas in as few words as possible, like a hypothesis.
• Be precise and complex enough that it does not simply answer a closed “yes or no” question, but requires an analysis of arguments and literature prior to its being considered acceptable. 
• Be arguable or testable so that answers to the research question are open to scrutiny and specific questions and counterarguments.

Some of these characteristics might be difficult to understand in the form of a list. Let’s go into more detail about what a research question must do and look at some examples of research questions.

The research question should be specific and focused 

Research questions that are too broad are not suitable to be addressed in a single study. One reason for this can be if there are many factors or variables to consider. In addition, a sample data set that is too large or an experimental timeline that is too long may suggest that the research question is not focused enough.

A specific research question means that the collective data and observations come together to either confirm or deny the chosen hypothesis in a clear manner. If a research question is too vague, then the data might end up creating an alternate research problem or hypothesis that you haven’t addressed in your Introduction section .

The research question should be based on the literature 

An effective research question should be answerable and verifiable based on prior research because an effective scientific study must be placed in the context of a wider academic consensus. This means that conspiracy or fringe theories are not good research paper topics.

Instead, a good research question must extend, examine, and verify the context of your research field. It should fit naturally within the literature and be searchable by other research authors.

References to the literature can be in different citation styles and must be properly formatted according to the guidelines set forth by the publishing journal, university, or academic institution. This includes in-text citations as well as the Reference section . 

The research question should be realistic in time, scope, and budget

There are two main constraints to the research process: timeframe and budget.

A proper research question will include study or experimental procedures that can be executed within a feasible time frame, typically by a graduate doctoral or master’s student or lab technician. Research that requires future technology, expensive resources, or follow-up procedures is problematic.

A researcher’s budget is also a major constraint to performing timely research. Research at many large universities or institutions is publicly funded and is thus accountable to funding restrictions. 

The research question should be in-depth

Research papers, dissertations and theses , and academic journal articles are usually dozens if not hundreds of pages in length.

A good research question or thesis statement must be sufficiently complex to warrant such a length, as it must stand up to the scrutiny of peer review and be reproducible by other scientists and researchers.

Research Question Types

Qualitative and quantitative research are the two major types of research, and it is essential to develop research questions for each type of study. 

Quantitative Research Questions

Quantitative research questions are specific. A typical research question involves the population to be studied, dependent and independent variables, and the research design.

In addition, quantitative research questions connect the research question and the research design. In addition, it is not possible to answer these questions definitively with a “yes” or “no” response. For example, scientific fields such as biology, physics, and chemistry often deal with “states,” in which different quantities, amounts, or velocities drastically alter the relevance of the research.

As a consequence, quantitative research questions do not contain qualitative, categorical, or ordinal qualifiers such as “is,” “are,” “does,” or “does not.”

Categories of quantitative research questions

Qualitative Research Questions

In quantitative research, research questions have the potential to relate to broad research areas as well as more specific areas of study. Qualitative research questions are less directional, more flexible, and adaptable compared with their quantitative counterparts. Thus, studies based on these questions tend to focus on “discovering,” “explaining,” “elucidating,” and “exploring.”

Categories of qualitative research questions

Quantitative and Qualitative Research Question Examples

Good and Bad Research Question Examples

Below are some good (and not-so-good) examples of research questions that researchers can use to guide them in crafting their own research questions.

Research Question Example 1

The first research question is too vague in both its independent and dependent variables. There is no specific information on what “exposure” means. Does this refer to comments, likes, engagement, or just how much time is spent on the social media platform?

Second, there is no useful information on what exactly “affected” means. Does the subject’s behavior change in some measurable way? Or does this term refer to another factor such as the user’s emotions?

Research Question Example 2

In this research question, the first example is too simple and not sufficiently complex, making it difficult to assess whether the study answered the question. The author could really only answer this question with a simple “yes” or “no.” Further, the presence of data would not help answer this question more deeply, which is a sure sign of a poorly constructed research topic.

The second research question is specific, complex, and empirically verifiable. One can measure program effectiveness based on metrics such as attendance or grades. Further, “bullying” is made into an empirical, quantitative measurement in the form of recorded disciplinary actions.

Steps for Writing a Research Question

Good research questions are relevant, focused, and meaningful. It can be difficult to come up with a good research question, but there are a few steps you can follow to make it a bit easier.

1. Start with an interesting and relevant topic

Choose a research topic that is interesting but also relevant and aligned with your own country’s culture or your university’s capabilities. Popular academic topics include healthcare and medical-related research. However, if you are attending an engineering school or humanities program, you should obviously choose a research question that pertains to your specific study and major.

Below is an embedded graph of the most popular research fields of study based on publication output according to region. As you can see, healthcare and the basic sciences receive the most funding and earn the highest number of publications. 

2. Do preliminary research  

You can begin doing preliminary research once you have chosen a research topic. Two objectives should be accomplished during this first phase of research. First, you should undertake a preliminary review of related literature to discover issues that scholars and peers are currently discussing. With this method, you show that you are informed about the latest developments in the field.

Secondly, identify knowledge gaps or limitations in your topic by conducting a preliminary literature review . It is possible to later use these gaps to focus your research question after a certain amount of fine-tuning.

3. Narrow your research to determine specific research questions

You can focus on a more specific area of study once you have a good handle on the topic you want to explore. Focusing on recent literature or knowledge gaps is one good option. 

By identifying study limitations in the literature and overlooked areas of study, an author can carve out a good research question. The same is true for choosing research questions that extend or complement existing literature.

4. Evaluate your research question

Make sure you evaluate the research question by asking the following questions:

Is my research question clear?

The resulting data and observations that your study produces should be clear. For quantitative studies, data must be empirical and measurable. For qualitative, the observations should be clearly delineable across categories.

Is my research question focused and specific?

A strong research question should be specific enough that your methodology or testing procedure produces an objective result, not one left to subjective interpretation. Open-ended research questions or those relating to general topics can create ambiguous connections between the results and the aims of the study. 

Is my research question sufficiently complex?

The result of your research should be consequential and substantial (and fall sufficiently within the context of your field) to warrant an academic study. Simply reinforcing or supporting a scientific consensus is superfluous and will likely not be well received by most journal editors.  

Editing Your Research Question

Your research question should be fully formulated well before you begin drafting your research paper. However, you can receive English paper editing and proofreading services at any point in the drafting process. Language editors with expertise in your academic field can assist you with the content and language in your Introduction section or other manuscript sections. And if you need further assistance or information regarding paper compositions, in the meantime, check out our academic resources , which provide dozens of articles and videos on a variety of academic writing and publication topics.

Dissertations & projects: Research questions

• Research questions
• The process of reviewing
• Project management
• Literature-based projects

Jump to content on these pages:

“The central question that you ask or hypothesis you frame drives your research: it defines your purpose.” Bryan Greetham, How to Write Your Undergraduate Dissertation

This page gives some help and guidance in developing a realistic research question. It also considers the role of sub-questions and how these can influence your methodological choices. 

Choosing your research topic

You may have been provided with a list of potential topics or even specific questions to choose from. It is more common for you to have to come up with your own ideas and then refine them with the help of your tutor. This is a crucial decision as you will be immersing yourself in it for a long time.

Some students struggle to find a topic that is sufficiently significant and yet researchable within the limitations of an undergraduate project. You may feel overwhelmed by the freedom to choose your own topic but you could get ideas by considering the following:

Choose a topic that you find interesting . This may seem obvious but a lot of students go for what they think will be easy over what they think will be interesting - and regret it when they realise nothing is particularly easy and they are bored by the work. Think back over your lectures or talks from visiting speakers - was there anything you really enjoyed? Was there anything that left you with questions?

Choose something distinct . Whilst at undergraduate level you do not have to find something completely unique, if you find something a bit different you have more opportunity to come to some interesting conclusions. Have you some unique experiences that you can bring: personal biography, placements, study abroad etc?

Don't make your topic too wide . If your topic is too wide, it will be harder to develop research questions that you can actually answer in the context of a small research project.

Don't make your work too narrow . If your topic is too narrow, you will not be able to expand on the ideas sufficiently and make useful conclusions. You may also struggle to find enough literature to support it.

Scope out the field before deciding your topic . This is especially important if you have a few different options and are not sure which to pick. Spend a little time researching each one to get a feel for the amount of literature that exists and any particular avenues that could be worth exploring.

Think about your future . Some topics may fit better than others with your future plans, be they for further study or employment. Becoming more expert in something that you may have to be interviewed about is never a bad thing!

Once you have an idea (or even a few), speak to your tutor. They will advise on whether it is the right sort of topic for a dissertation or independent study. They have a lot of experience and will know if it is too much to take on, has enough material to build on etc.

Developing a research question or hypothesis

Research question vs hypothesis.

First, it may be useful to explain the difference between a research question and a hypothesis. A research question is simply a question that your research will address and hopefully answer (or give an explanation of why you couldn't answer it). A hypothesis is a statement that suggests how you expect something to function or behave (and which you would test to see if it actually happens or not).

Research question examples

• How significant is league table position when students choose their university?
• What impact can a diagnosis of depression have on physical health?

Note that these are open questions - i.e. they cannot be answered with a simple 'yes' or 'no'. This is the best form of question.

Hypotheses examples

• Students primarily choose their university based on league table position.
• A diagnosis of depression can impact physical health.

Note that these are things that you can test to see if they are true or false. This makes them more definite then research questions - but you can still answer them more fully than 'no they don't' or 'yes it does'. For example, in the above examples you would look to see how relevant other factors were when choosing universities and in what ways physical health may be impacted.

For more examples of the same topic formulated as hypotheses, research questions and paper titles see those given at the bottom of this document from Oakland University: Formulation of Research Hypothesis

Which do you need?

Generally, research questions are more common in the humanities, social sciences and business, whereas hypotheses are more common in the sciences. This is not a hard rule though, talk things through with your supervisor to see which they are expecting or which they think fits best with your topic.

What makes a good research question or hypothesis?

Unless you are undertaking a systematic review as your research method, you will develop your research question  as a result of reviewing the literature on your broader topic. After all, it is only by seeing what research has already been done (or not) that you can justify the need for your question or your approach to answering it. At the end of that process, you should be able to come up with a question or hypothesis that is:

• Clear (easily understandable)
• Focused (specific not vague or huge)
• Answerable (the data is available and analysable in the time frame)
• Relevant (to your area of study)
• Significant (it is worth answering)

You can try a few out, using a table like this (yours would all be in the same discipline):

A similar, though different table is available from the University of California: What makes a good research topic?   The completed table has some supervisor comments which may also be helpful.

Ultimately, your final research question will be mutually agreed between yourself and your supervisor - but you should always bring your own ideas to the conversation.

The role of sub-questions

Your main research question will probably still be too big to answer easily. This is where sub-questions come in. They are specific, narrower questions that you can answer directly from your data.

So, looking at the question " How much do online users know and care about how their self-images can be used by Apple, Google, Microsoft and Facebook? " from the table above, the sub-questions could be:

• What rights do the terms and conditions of signing up for Apple, Google, Microsoft and Facebook accounts give those companies regarding the use of self-images?
• What proportion of users read the terms and conditions when creating accounts with these companies?
• How aware are users of the rights they are giving away regarding their self-images when creating accounts with these companies?
• How comfortable are users with giving away these rights?

Together, the answers to your sub-questions should enable you to answer the overarching research question.

How do you answer your sub-questions?

Depending on the type of dissertation/project your are undertaking, some (or all) the questions may be answered with information collected from the literature and some (or none) may be answered by analysing data directly collected as part of your primary empirical research .

In the above example, the first question would be answered by documentary analysis of the relevant terms and conditions, the second by a mixture of reviewing the literature and analysing survey responses from participants and the last two also by analysing survey responses. Different projects will require different approaches.

Some sub-questions could be answered by reviewing the literature and others from empirical study.

• << Previous: Home
• Next: Searching >>
• Last Updated: Apr 24, 2024 1:09 PM
• URL: https://libguides.hull.ac.uk/dissertations
• Login to LibApps
• Library websites Privacy Policy
• University of Hull privacy policy & cookies
• Website terms and conditions
• Accessibility
• Report a problem

Writing the Dissertation - Guides for Success: Research Question

• Writing the Dissertation Homepage
• Overview and Planning
• Research Question
• Literature Review
• Methodology
• Results and Discussion
• Picking a Topic
• Questions and Hypotheses
• Room for Refinement
• Action Words
• Preparing to Research

Overview of developing research questions

Effective writing should have a clear purpose, and purpose shines through the best when an essay or dissertation responds to an explicit research question(s).  Sometimes, you will need to define or refine a research question based on an essay title provided by an instructor. In the case of dissertations and theses, you will start from scratch, developing one or more research question(s) to anchor and guide a major piece of work.

A research question is powerful: it shapes the focus and breadth of your reading, suggests the data you will need to access or produce, underpins choices related to method/methodology, and more. Therefore, it's crucial to build experience both in inventing and amending research questions.

Guide contents

The tabs of this guide will support you in developing research questions and/or hypotheses to get your writing project started. The sections are organised as follows:

• Picking a Topic  - Tips on finding the broad starting place for your essay or writing project.
• Questions and Hypotheses  - Learn how to develop your idea into a workable hypothesis or research question.
• Room for Refinement  - Explore ways to fine-tune your question to allow maximum depth and criticality.
• Action Words   - Help deciding on the right verbs to frame what you will do in your writing.
• Preparing to Research  - With your question decided, here's a concise outline to begin the research process.

Getting started: the topic

The first things you will need to do when starting your research are to think of a subject or topic  for your writing project and design either a hypothesis (a statement for investigation) or question that you will address. Let's start with picking the subject.

Inspiration

When embarking on a thesis or dissertation , you can find the inspiration for your research topic from anywhere: for example, the media, current affairs, art, literature, technology, or your course notes and general reading interests. Above all, it is important that you are interested in and enthusiastic about your topic. You will be a more successful researcher if you care about your project.

If you are starting an  essay  rather than a final project, odds are you will be assigned a general subject. However, within the broad essay title/instructions, there may be scope to  tailor the focus.

 – Our Understanding the Assignment guide goes into more depth about unpicking and responding to assigned essay titles.

Your supervisor's role

You needn't discuss your approach to every essay with the lecturer ahead of time. However, if working on a major project , make sure you discuss your topic with your supervisor. This includes chatting with them about changes to, expansions of, etc. your topic. Academic supervisors might do some of the following:

• Talk through whether the subject matter is suitable for your own skill set;
• Indicate if they are happy to work with you on your chosen topic;
• Advise you on the availability of information and resources on your topic, or if any problems are likely to arise;
• Help you to shape/refine your hypothesis or question.

Supervisors vary in how directive they get with student projects: there are many valid approaches to supervision. However, if you are ever concerned about the supervision you're receiving, consider discussing this with your Personal Academic Tutor.

In any case, you should  not  expect your academic supervisor to simply give you a 'good topic' – learning to develop research questions is a vital part of independent study, so while it can take trial and error, the process is worth it to improve as a scholar in your field.

From topic to hypothesis/question

Once you have decided upon the general topic and the main issues you wish to address, then you can think about developing your hypothesis or question in a more detailed way.  Hypotheses  need to be carefully phrased as the wording is an indication of what will be discussed in your essay. The hypothesis not only gives the reader information about the content you will write about, but also how you will approach the topic.

We'll explore an organised way to begin developing your hypothesis/question on the next tab.

Developing your hypothes(es) or question(s)

In developing your hypothesis or question, experiment with  starting broad  and gradually  narrowing the focus.  Work through the sequence of questions below to begin:

What subject?

What general field of study do you want to cover in the course of your research and writing? In some cases, this is self-evident: 'I'm a Biology student, so I'll cover Biology, of course.' However, some projects lend themselves to an  interdisciplinary approach,  meaning you will link or combine multiple subjects. For example...

• The fields of Medicine and Philosophy intersect when considering medical ethics, which could raise an initial question such as, ‘What are the ethical dimensions of denying NHS treatment on account of lifestyle choices?’
• The fields of History, Linguistics, and Queer Studies might intersect in undertaking an analysis of letters written between same-sex couples in the late 1800s.

Inventory your research interests and assess whether they nest neatly inside one discipline or are interdisciplinary in nature.

What theme?

• For the fields of History, Government and Politics, you could look at a theme such as U.S. foreign policy.
• For the field of Biomedical Engineering, you could look at the theme of smart prosthetics.
• For the field of Marketing, you could look at the theme of multi-channel retailing.

What context?

The themes above are too wide to tackle in a single piece of research. For example, 'U.S. foreign policy' could cover a ~250-year period that spans American relationships with nearly 200 different countries: that's too much! Therefore, the next step is to pick a context for your theme. For example...

• U.S. foreign policy as related to Iran in the twenty-first century.
• Smart prosthetics used by individuals with acquired lower-limb shortening.
• Multi-channel retailing among organic food brands in the UK.

As you can see, this context step continues to narrow down the focus of the initial subject and theme.

What specific angle?

Here, you will carefully consider the theme and its context, and ask yourself, 'What, specifically, is  relevant to find out about this theme?' Or, put another way, what do you want to  discover?  The answers to questions like these will suggest a  meaningful angle  for your project. For example...

• Question: What role did the U.S. play in the 2009 Iranian elections?
• Hypothesis: Lower-limb prosthetic sockets could be redesigned with innovative materials to improve shock absorption and, thus, user comfort.
• Question: Which marketing channels are proving most effective for customer acquisition amongst organic food brands currently operating in the UK?

Bear in mind that longer projects such as dissertations and theses often address  a handful of related questions  – so don't panic if you can't boil it down to just one question!

What methodology?

Finally, it's time for a reality check: your idea might be fantastic, but is there a realistic way to produce meaningful answers? For example, this is an intriguing question:

Leading up to the 2016 Brexit vote, to what extent did the privately expressed opinions of top officials in the UK government align with, or contradict, their publicly made statements?

However intriguing that question, it would be difficult or impossible to research: how would you gather evidence of 'privately expressed opinions' in an ethical, reliable way? (Hacking governmental memos or email accounts definitely runs afoul of academic responsibility and conduct!)

Therefore, you need to vet whether a sound methodology can underpin your choice of theme(s), context and angle(s). You don't need to define every detail of your method at this stage, but ask yourself questions like these:

• For example, is it possible to compare and contrast the official responses of the U.S. and Iranian governments by using public speeches? Is there any further evidence of American involvement in the election highlighted in press reports, or online sources such as YouTube and Twitter? Which sources can you use to confirm facts, and which to confirm public perceptions/opinions?
• For example, have any organic food brands published their data on customer acquisition strategies? If not, how could you measure this using publicly available information and/or direct correspondence with brands?
• Top tip: The Engagement Librarian for your subject area can advise on access to materials. See your subject page for more information.
• Identifying an ethical consideration doesn't necessarily mean you need to abandon your idea, but you will need to review the University Ethics Policy , discuss your idea with your supervisor, and, if deemed necessary, apply for ethics approval before proceeding.

The benefits

If you write a well considered hypothesis or question you can:

• Narrow your research and focus more carefully;
• Make better choices for the selection of your reading;
• From your reading you can select information more carefully and get the right evidence to include in your essay/project;
• Structure your writing to address the question(s) more directly;
• Transform your original hypothesis into a final thesis statement that frames your writing: see our Crafting the Introduction guide for more on thesis statements.

Refine and shine

All activities within the writing process are  iterative:  that is, you have to go through multiple versions (i.e., iterations) of what you're producing in order to improve it. In fact, your research questions may continue to evolve even once the research is underway. Such evolution is normal, so don't panic if you start to doubt your hypothesis halfway through writing up your work. Instead, use your growing knowledge base and new insights to make  informed changes  to your question(s) or hypothes(es).

Below, we'll work through some examples of ways that research questions might shift or be improved.

Think argument

It is essential that you can clearly develop an argument from the hypothesis or question that you pose. Avoid generalisations that are not possible to substantiate, for example...

Bad:  The relationship between humanity and nature.

What is this trying to talk about? It could cover so many different topics and subjects that it needs to be much more focused. A better question would target  specific relations between humanity and nature, for example...

Better example:  Has humanity overcome the threat of earthquakes through its specially engineered buildings?

• This question would examine mankind’s relationship with nature in light of geological factors.
• However,  while this question is better than the 'bad' original, it could be further improved – more on that shortly!

Avoid the yes/no trap

Let's return to the question above and consider the  type of answer  that its phrasing invites:

Has humanity overcome the threat of earthquakes through its specially engineered buildings?

In this case, the  wording  used encourages a response of either 'yes' or 'no' – either 'yes,' humanity has overcome the threat entirely (hurrah!), or 'no,' engineering has done nothing to stop the threat (boo!). However, the situation is surely more complex than that. A yes/no framing is therefore a poor foundation for the research, as it might compel the writer to  sacrifice critical nuance  in favour of a straightforward answer.

What if the writer were instead to consider phrasing options like these? 

To what extent do specially engineered buildings mitigate the threat of earthquakes in major cities?

Which innovations in building design have proved most effective in reducing human casualties during earthquakes?

How can buildings be reengineered to minimise the threat to life posed by earthquakes?

These iterations of the question might not be perfect, but notice how they encourage greater complexity of response. The writer has moved away from a yes/no framing to instead pose questions that will allow richer, more layered answers to be explored in the body of the essay or project.

Is yes/no ever okay?

In short, yes – this is sometimes okay. However, you should treat any yes/no question with caution. In many cases, a yes/no question functions better when  paired with  or  embedded within  a question of more nuanced phrasing. For example...

Could polymer XYZ be replaced with polymer ABC in the manufacture of technology Q? If so, what implications exist for the cost and longevity of the final product?

Here, the first question is yes/no in nature – and for some assessment types, it might be sufficient! However, the second question builds upon the first to add more depth and relevance.

Expect detours

In many cases, research questions must be refined not because they are 'bad' or problematic, but instead due to either 1) evolution of interests/knowledge or 2) change(s) in research circumstances. The prior can loosely be understood as internally driven  whilst the latter is externally driven.  The examples below illustrate how these shifts might look in practice.

Evolution of interests/knowledge

Sam plans to critically evaluate the TV show  The Walking Dead  through the lens of disability theory in their dissertation. They begin the project with a set of related research questions that includes this one:

How do depictions of facial differences (e.g. scars, burns) in  The Walking Dead  reinforce – or alternately, subvert – the damaging trope of the 'Disabled Villain'?

This question operates well alongside Sam's other enquiries/hypotheses, and they make a strong start on their research. However, the deeper Sam gets into their analysis, the more they find themself writing about the show's depictions of amputations and prostheses rather than facial differences. Therefore, Sam decides to revise the focal question as so:

To what extent does loss of limbs operate as a metaphor for change to internal character throughout  The Walking Dead,  and do these depictions cumulatively serve to reify or subvert persistent tropes of disability in filmed media?

In this manner, Sam refined their research question to respond to an  evolution of interest  as well as their  expanding knowledge  of the source material. The 'detour' was  internal  as Sam didn't technically  need  to change directions, but by realigning the question with what they are actually curious about, the resulting dissertation will surely be richer.

Change(s) in research circumstances

The more panic-inducing 'detours' are those compelled by  external change  over which the writer has little or no control. Circumstantial changes that might impact the feasibility of your research question(s) include things like the following (click each dropdown heading to see examples):

 Access to required data 

• Problem: You intended to analyse items held overseas in a historical archive. However, your funding request to visit the archive was rejected, and the archive curators say they can't digitise the items for you.
• Potential solution:  Can you conduct an equivalent analyis of items held in an archive you  can  access? For example, an archive maintained by a UK library or university, or an international archive that has already been digitised?

Availability of collaborators/partners for the research 

• Problem: You intended to test the efficiency of a water filtration design by partnering with someone whose engineering specialty fills a vital gap in your abilities. However, they bail. You can't produce the whole filtration system on your own.
• Potential solutions:  Could your supervisor help you find an appropriate collaborator to backfill the one who bailed? If not, could you test the design using computer modelling rather than building it 'IRL'? Alternately, could you test the durability, environmental friendliness, etc. of the design element you  can  produce rather than testing the efficiency of the entire system?

 Current events

• Problem: Your MA is intended to culminate in a fieldwork experience during the spring of your degree. The fieldwork will underpin your entire dissertation. Unfortunately, conflict emerges in the geographical area of your planned fieldwork, and you can't safely proceed with traveling/working there.
• Potential solutions:  In this case, your supervisor should definitely help you figure out an alternate plan! You might need to engage in fieldwork in a different area entirely, which will of course changes the precise question(s) you're asking. Alternately, your supervisor might encourage you to work with existing literature/data rather than gathering new data in the field.

A change to the feasibility of your  method(ology)  doesn't always mean you need to abandon your research question(s). If your question relates to the concept of customer satisfaction, for example, there could be many valid ways to measure and interpret that central concept.

If a circumstantial change pushes your plan off course,  think creatively  and  think widely  about potential solutions. And if this happens whilst tackling your dissertation or thesis, contact your supervisor ASAP to arrange a meeting.

The role of sub-questions

Finally, understand that you may need to ask (and answer) additional questions in order to address your central question: this is especially true of  dissertations and theses.  Think of these additional enquiries as  sub-questions.  Let's return to Sam's original research question from earlier:

This is phrased as one question, but let's slow down and consider how Sam can  satisfactorily answer that central question. To provide rich, nuanced answers, Sam might actually need to ask a series of questions that build upon one another:

• How is the trope defined, discussed, etc. across research in Disability Studies?
• How is the trope defined, discussed, etc. across research in Film Studies?
• Are certain facial differences (e.g. a missing eye, a prominent scar) ascribed more often to certain character archetypes?
• Finally, having explored the above, how do depictions of facial differences in  The Walking Dead  serve to reinforce or subvert the trope of the 'Disabled Villain'?

Sam won't necessarily use the same  method  or approach to answer each question. For instance...

• Sam will likely  review and synthesize existing literature  from the fields of Disability Studies and Film Studies to answer the first sub-question.
• To answer the second sub-question, Sam will engage in close viewing and interpretation of the TV show.
• Finally, to answer the overarching question, Sam will use relevant theory as a lens to frame their firsthand textual analysis  of the TV show, thereby drawing  original conclusions.

Therefore, as you refine your research question, consider building out a  mind map  or  bulleted list  of the  implied  questions that underpin your main enquiry. Making these sub-questions explicit in the writing can help ensure the research proceeds in a logical way from A to B, B to C, etc.

Verbs are vital

Essay questions/titles provided by module leads usually hinge around one or more specific  verb(s): that is,  action word(s)  or instruction(s) of  what to do,  e.g. 'Discuss,' 'Explain,' 'Evaluate,' etc.  For example, imagine Daria's module lead has issued this essay prompt:

Instructor's prompt: 'Trace the evolution of rotor designs in functional helicopters from 1940 onward.'

Daria considers the prompt and her research interests, and she comes up with this hypothesis to kickstart her writing:

Hypothesis: 'In contemporary helicopters, height-based and weight-based adjustments to rotor blades minimize vibration in order to prevent stalling and ensure safe flights.'

Okay, perhaps that's true, but can you see the problems? First, Daria's hypothesis reads more as a statement of fact than a focusing concept for an essay – it's hard to tell what Daria plans to actually do in the writing. Second, Daria has ignored the key  verb  in the prompt, which was 'trace'  – this means she should follow the development of rotor designs over time rather than comparing designs of the present day.

But what if you are designing your own essay/dissertation question or hypothesis rather than following an instructor's prompt?

Picking your own verbs

Essay verbs are every bit as vital when designing our own research questions and hypotheses!  You will need to think about these words and their usage, as they will indicate what is to come in your essay or dissertation. For example, imagine you write that you will 'analyse' a situation, but then your essay simply 'summarises' the situation.

• The verb 'analyse' suggests that you will describe the main ideas in depth, showing why they are important, how they are connected, etc. in a critical manner.
• The verb 'summarise' means that you will offer a concise account of main points without critical elaboration.

The  mismatch  between what you stated you would do and what you actually delivered will likely compel the marker to assign a lower mark to your work.

In the context of a  dissertation or thesis ,  you are likely to use  multiple verbs  to describe what you will do, given the complexity of the work at hand. These typically appear in your introduction as well as the opening paragraphs of your individual chapters, e.g. 'This chapter will first  define  condition ABC and then  compare  divergent perspectives on its treatment.'

 – Need a hand understanding the verbs you can choose from and which is the best fit? Check out the 'The Verb' tab of our Understanding the Assignment guide for a comprehensive list.

When you have posed your hypothesis or question, check your department’s guidelines:

• How long should the assignment be?
• What is the deadline?
• What other requirements are there (presentation, referencing, bibliography, etc.)?

Basic research

Start with basic reading to get an overview of the topic and the current issues surrounding it. Keep the question in mind as you do your initial research:

• Lecture and seminar notes.
• Relevant chapters in core textbooks.
• Frequently cited and recent articles.
• Websites: The internet is a hugely valuable resource for research, but remember to verify that the information you have located is academically reliable.

You can think of this first research phase as 'dipping your toes in the water.' It's helpful to get a sense of the overall landscape before investing too much time unpicking highly complex, sprawling literature.

Detailed research

When you are familiar with the basics, move on to more advanced texts where you will find detail on the variety of academic opinions on a given topic and suitable supporting evidence:

• Articles in academic journals (use your Library Search account to get started).
• Texts referred to by your lecturers or supervisor.
• References in core texts (you can expand your reading by checking footnotes, endnotes and bibliographies of core texts to find related work and sources).
• General and specialist databases (check your Library subject page for databases suggested for your discipline).

Be selective

It is essential to always make sure your examples are  relevant to the topic in hand. Keep the question in mind, and check the relevance of the material you read and note down.

• << Previous: Overview and Planning
• Next: Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Sep 13, 2024 9:48 AM
• URL: https://library.soton.ac.uk/writing_the_dissertation

• +44 (0) 207 391 9032

Recent Posts

• How to Write a Reflective Essay

Abstract vs. Introduction: What’s the Difference?

• How Do AI detectors Work? Breaking Down the Algorithm
• What is a Literature Review? Definition, Types, and Examples
• Why Is Your CV Getting Rejected and How to Avoid It
• Where to Find Images for Presentations
• What Is an Internship? Everything You Should Know
• How Long Should a Thesis Statement Be?
• How to Write a Character Analysis Essay
• Best Colours for Your PowerPoint Presentation: Top Colour Combinations
• Academic News
• Custom Essays
• Dissertation Writing
• Essay Marking
• Essay Writing
• Essay Writing Companies
• Model Essays
• Model Exam Answers
• Oxbridge Essays Updates
• PhD Writing
• Significant Academics
• Student News
• Study Skills
• University Applications
• University Essays
• University Life
• Writing Tips

How to Write Research Questions for Your Dissertation

(Last updated: 4 September 2024)

Since 2006, Oxbridge Essays has been the UK’s leading paid essay-writing and dissertation service

We have helped 10,000s of undergraduate, Masters and PhD students to maximise their grades in essays, dissertations, model-exam answers, applications and other materials. If you would like a free chat about your project with one of our UK staff, then please just reach out on one of the methods below.

Crafting clear and effective research questions is a crucial aspect of preparing PhD theses or undergraduate and Master’s dissertations. Research questions serve as the foundation for your study, guiding your investigation and framing your findings. In this blog post, we'll explore strategies for writing strong research questions, including the use of sub-questions and different types of research question formats.

How to Write a Strong Research Question

Here's how to develop a strong research question that is clear, focused, and relevant to your field of study.

1. Choose a Research Question Relevant to Your Field

Commence by selecting a research question that aligns with the interests and priorities of your academic field. Consider current debates, gaps in the existing literature, and emerging trends that warrant further exploration. Your research question should contribute new insights or perspectives to the field and address a meaningful issue or problem.

2. Conduct Preliminary Research

Before finalising your research question, conduct preliminary research to familiarise yourself with the existing literature and identify potential gaps or areas for investigation. Explore relevant journals, books, and academic databases to gain a comprehensive understanding of the topic and identify key concepts or variables to explore further.

3. Narrow Your Research to Determine Specific Questions

Once you have identified the key concepts or variables, narrow down your focus to determine specific research questions. Consider the scope of your study and the depth of analysis required to address your research objectives effectively. Avoid overly broad or vague questions and aim for clarity and precision in formulating your research inquiries.

4. Evaluate Your Research Question

Before finalising your research question, critically evaluate it to ensure it meets the criteria of a strong research question. Assess whether the question is clear, focused, and relevant to your field of study. Consider whether it aligns with the objectives of your research project and the feasibility of addressing it within your time and resource constraints. Seek feedback from peers, tutors, or academic advisors to refine and improve your research question further.

Using Sub-Questions

In addition to your main research question, you may also include sub-questions to further clarify your focus and guide your investigation. Sub-questions can help break down complex topics into manageable components and provide a more nuanced understanding of your research area. When crafting sub-questions, ensure they are directly related to your main research question and contribute to the overall coherence of your study.

Research Question Types

Research questions can be classified into qualitative and quantitative formats, depending on the nature of your study. Qualitative research questions explore subjective experiences, meanings, and interpretations, while quantitative questions investigate relationships between variables and seek to quantify phenomena.

• Qualitative Research Question Example : "How do individuals experience and cope with chronic pain in their daily lives?"
• Quantitative Research Question Example : "What is the relationship between social media usage and mental health outcomes among adolescents?"

Crafting Strong Research Questions

Crafting strong research questions is a fundamental step in the thesis or dissertation process, setting the direction for your study and guiding your research endeavours. A well-crafted research question not only clarifies the focus of your investigation but also lays the groundwork for meaningful scholarly contribution. It serves as a roadmap, guiding the trajectory of your research and ensuring that your study remains focused and purposeful.

Top 10 tips for writing a dissertation methodology

Advice for successfully writing a dissertation, writing services.

• Essay Plans
• Critical Reviews
• Literature Reviews
• Presentations
• Dissertation Title Creation
• Dissertation Proposals
• Dissertation Chapters
• PhD Proposals
• Journal Publication
• CV Writing Service
• Business Proofreading Services

Editing Services

• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• Academic Editing Service

Additional Services

• Marking Services
• Consultation Calls
• Personal Statements
• Tutoring Services

Our Company

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Become a Writer

Terms & Policies

• Fair Use Policy
• Policy for Students in England
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Editing Service Examples
• [email protected]
• Contact Form

Payment Methods

Cryptocurrency payments.

• How it works

Research Question Examples – Guide & Tips

Published by Owen Ingram at August 13th, 2021 , Revised On April 4, 2024

All  research questions should be focused, researchable, feasible to answer, specific to find results, complex, and relevant to your field of study. The research question’s factors will be; the research problem ,  research type , project length, and time frame.

Research questions provide boundaries to your research project and provide a clear approach to collect and compile data. Understanding your research question better is necessary to find unique facts and figures to publish your research.

Search and study some research question examples or research questions relevant to your field of study before writing your own research question.

Research Questions for Dissertation Examples

Below are 10 examples of research questions that will enable you to develop research questions for your research.

These examples will help you to check whether your chosen research questions can be addressed or whether they are too broad to find a conclusive answer.

Does your Research Methodology Have the Following?

Orders completed by our expert writers are

• Great Research/Sources
• Perfect Language
• Accurate Sources

If not, we can help. Our panel of experts makes sure to keep the 3 pillars of Research Methodology strong.

A dissertation is an important milestone no matter what academic level or subject it is. You will be asked to write a dissertation on a  topic of your choice  and make a substantial contribution to academic and scientific communities.

The project will start with the  planning and designing of a project before the actual write-up phase. There are many stages in the dissertation process , but the most important is developing a research question that guides your research.

If you are starting your dissertation, you will have to conduct preliminary research to  find a problem and research gap as the first step of the process. The second step is to write  research questions that specify your topic and the relevant problem you want to address.

How can we Help you with Research Questions?

If you are still unsure about writing dissertation research questions and perhaps want to see  more examples , you might be interested in getting help from our dissertation writers.

At ResearchProspect, we have UK-qualified writers holding Masters and PhD degrees in all academic subjects. Whether you need help with only developing research questions or any other aspect of your dissertation paper , we are here to help you achieve your desired grades for an affordable price.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are some examples of a research question.

Examples of research questions:

• How does social media influence self-esteem in adolescents?
• What are the economic impacts of climate change on agriculture?
• What factors contribute to employee job satisfaction in the tech industry?
• How does exercise frequency affect cardiovascular health?
• What is the relationship between sleep duration and academic performance in college students?

What are some examples of research questions in the classroom?

• How do interactive whiteboards impact student engagement?
• Does peer tutoring improve maths proficiency?
• How does classroom seating arrangement influence student participation?
• What’s the effect of gamified learning on student motivation?
• Does integrating technology in lessons enhance critical thinking skills?
• How does feedback frequency affect student performance?

What are some examples of research questions in Geography?

• How does urbanisation impact local microclimates?
• What factors influence water scarcity in Region X?
• How do migration patterns correlate with economic disparities?
• What’s the relationship between deforestation and soil erosion in Area Y?
• How have coastlines changed over the past decade?
• Why are certain regions’ biodiversity hotspots?

What are some examples of research questions in Psychology?

• How does social media usage affect adolescent self-esteem?
• What factors contribute to resilience in trauma survivors?
• How does sleep deprivation impact decision-making abilities?
• Are certain teaching methods more effective for children with ADHD?
• What are the psychological effects of long-term social isolation?
• How do early attachments influence adult relationships?

What are the three basic research questions?

The three basic types of research questions are:

• Descriptive: Seeks to depict a phenomenon or issue. E.g., “What are the symptoms of depression?”
• Relational: Investigates relationships between variables. E.g., “Is there a correlation between stress and heart disease?”
• Causal: Determines cause and effect. E.g., “Does smoking cause lung cancer?”

You May Also Like

Find how to write research questions with the mentioned steps required for a perfect research question. Choose an interesting topic and begin your research.

How to write a hypothesis for dissertation,? A hypothesis is a statement that can be tested with the help of experimental or theoretical research.

Let’s briefly examine the concept of research paradigms, their pillars, purposes, types, examples, and how they can be combined.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process

How to Choose a Dissertation Topic | 8 Steps to Follow

Published on November 11, 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George. Revised on November 20, 2023.

Choosing your dissertation topic is the first step in making sure your research goes as smoothly as possible. When choosing a topic, it’s important to consider:

• Your institution and department’s requirements
• Your areas of knowledge and interest
• The scientific, social, or practical relevance
• The availability of data and resources
• The timeframe of your dissertation
• The relevance of your topic

You can follow these steps to begin narrowing down your ideas.

Table of contents

Step 1: check the requirements, step 2: choose a broad field of research, step 3: look for books and articles, step 4: find a niche, step 5: consider the type of research, step 6: determine the relevance, step 7: make sure it’s plausible, step 8: get your topic approved, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about dissertation topics.

The very first step is to check your program’s requirements. This determines the scope of what it is possible for you to research.

• Is there a minimum and maximum word count?
• When is the deadline?
• Should the research have an academic or a professional orientation?
• Are there any methodological conditions? Do you have to conduct fieldwork, or use specific types of sources?

Some programs have stricter requirements than others. You might be given nothing more than a word count and a deadline, or you might have a restricted list of topics and approaches to choose from. If in doubt about what is expected of you, always ask your supervisor or department coordinator.

Start by thinking about your areas of interest within the subject you’re studying. Examples of broad ideas include:

• Twentieth-century literature
• Economic history
• Health policy

To get a more specific sense of the current state of research on your potential topic, skim through a few recent issues of the top journals in your field. Be sure to check out their most-cited articles in particular. For inspiration, you can also search Google Scholar , subject-specific databases , and your university library’s resources.

As you read, note down any specific ideas that interest you and make a shortlist of possible topics. If you’ve written other papers, such as a 3rd-year paper or a conference paper, consider how those topics can be broadened into a dissertation.

After doing some initial reading, it’s time to start narrowing down options for your potential topic. This can be a gradual process, and should get more and more specific as you go. For example, from the ideas above, you might narrow it down like this:

• Twentieth-century literature   Twentieth-century Irish literature   Post-war Irish poetry
• Economic history   European economic history   German labor union history
• Health policy   Reproductive health policy   Reproductive rights in South America

All of these topics are still broad enough that you’ll find a huge amount of books and articles about them. Try to find a specific niche where you can make your mark, such as: something not many people have researched yet, a question that’s still being debated, or a very current practical issue.

At this stage, make sure you have a few backup ideas — there’s still time to change your focus. If your topic doesn’t make it through the next few steps, you can try a different one. Later, you will narrow your focus down even more in your problem statement and research questions .

There are many different types of research , so at this stage, it’s a good idea to start thinking about what kind of approach you’ll take to your topic. Will you mainly focus on:

• Collecting original data (e.g., experimental or field research)?
• Analyzing existing data (e.g., national statistics, public records, or archives)?
• Interpreting cultural objects (e.g., novels, films, or paintings)?
• Comparing scholarly approaches (e.g., theories, methods, or interpretations)?

Many dissertations will combine more than one of these. Sometimes the type of research is obvious: if your topic is post-war Irish poetry, you will probably mainly be interpreting poems. But in other cases, there are several possible approaches. If your topic is reproductive rights in South America, you could analyze public policy documents and media coverage, or you could gather original data through interviews and surveys .

You don’t have to finalize your research design and methods yet, but the type of research will influence which aspects of the topic it’s possible to address, so it’s wise to consider this as you narrow down your ideas.

It’s important that your topic is interesting to you, but you’ll also have to make sure it’s academically, socially or practically relevant to your field.

• Academic relevance means that the research can fill a gap in knowledge or contribute to a scholarly debate in your field.
• Social relevance means that the research can advance our understanding of society and inform social change.
• Practical relevance means that the research can be applied to solve concrete problems or improve real-life processes.

The easiest way to make sure your research is relevant is to choose a topic that is clearly connected to current issues or debates, either in society at large or in your academic discipline. The relevance must be clearly stated when you define your research problem .

Before you make a final decision on your topic, consider again the length of your dissertation, the timeframe in which you have to complete it, and the practicalities of conducting the research.

Will you have enough time to read all the most important academic literature on this topic? If there’s too much information to tackle, consider narrowing your focus even more.

Will you be able to find enough sources or gather enough data to fulfil the requirements of the dissertation? If you think you might struggle to find information, consider broadening or shifting your focus.

Do you have to go to a specific location to gather data on the topic? Make sure that you have enough funding and practical access.

Last but not least, will the topic hold your interest for the length of the research process? To stay motivated, it’s important to choose something you’re enthusiastic about!

Most programmes will require you to submit a brief description of your topic, called a research prospectus or proposal .

Remember, if you discover that your topic is not as strong as you thought it was, it’s usually acceptable to change your mind and switch focus early in the dissertation process. Just make sure you have enough time to start on a new topic, and always check with your supervisor or department.

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

Methodology

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

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

Formulating a main research question can be a difficult task. Overall, your question should contribute to solving the problem that you have defined in your problem statement .

However, it should also fulfill criteria in three main areas:

• Researchability
• Feasibility and specificity
• Relevance and originality

All research questions should be:

• Focused on a single problem or issue
• Researchable using primary and/or secondary sources
• Feasible to answer within the timeframe and practical constraints
• Specific enough to answer thoroughly
• Complex enough to develop the answer over the space of a paper or thesis
• Relevant to your field of study and/or society more broadly

You can assess information and arguments critically by asking certain questions about the source. You can use the CRAAP test , focusing on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

Ask questions such as:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert?
• Why did the author publish it? What is their motivation?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence?

A dissertation prospectus or proposal describes what or who you plan to research for your dissertation. It delves into why, when, where, and how you will do your research, as well as helps you choose a type of research to pursue. You should also determine whether you plan to pursue qualitative or quantitative methods and what your research design will look like.

It should outline all of the decisions you have taken about your project, from your dissertation topic to your hypotheses and research objectives , ready to be approved by your supervisor or committee.

Note that some departments require a defense component, where you present your prospectus to your committee orally.

The best way to remember the difference between a research plan and a research proposal is that they have fundamentally different audiences. A research plan helps you, the researcher, organize your thoughts. On the other hand, a dissertation proposal or research proposal aims to convince others (e.g., a supervisor, a funding body, or a dissertation committee) that your research topic is relevant and worthy of being conducted.

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.

McCombes, S. & George, T. (2023, November 20). How to Choose a Dissertation Topic | 8 Steps to Follow. Scribbr. Retrieved September 16, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/dissertation-topic/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to define a research problem | ideas & examples, what is a research design | types, guide & examples, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

• Cookies & Privacy
• GETTING STARTED
• Introduction
• FUNDAMENTALS
• Acknowledgements
• Research questions & hypotheses
• Concepts, constructs & variables
• Research limitations
• Getting started
• Sampling Strategy
• Research Quality
• Research Ethics
• Data Analysis

Research Questions and Hypotheses

All dissertations answer at least one research question (and/or hypothesis ). A poorly constructed research question (and/or hypothesis) will not only be much more challenging to answer, but will also make it difficult for the person marking your dissertation to understand what you are trying to achieve.

The purpose of this Research Questions and Hypotheses section is to help you understand the different goals of research questions/hypotheses, the different types of research questions/hypotheses you can answer, how they should be structured , and whether you should create research questions or hypotheses.

The first factor you need to consider is the broad type of dissertation that you are following, whether a quantitative , qualitative or mixed methods dissertation. At this point, we only take you through quantitative research questions , which you may choose to answer in quantitative dissertations . However, please leave feedback if you would like to know when we launch sections helping you learn about hypotheses ( research and null hypotheses ), qualitative research questions and mixed methods research questions .

• Quantitative research questions

Research Writing and Analysis

• NVivo Group and Study Sessions
• SPSS This link opens in a new window
• Statistical Analysis Group sessions
• Using Qualtrics
• Dissertation and Data Analysis Group Sessions
• Defense Schedule - Commons Calendar This link opens in a new window
• Research Process Flow Chart
• Research Alignment Chapter 1 This link opens in a new window
• Step 1: Seek Out Evidence
• Step 2: Explain
• Step 3: The Big Picture
• Step 4: Own It
• Step 5: Illustrate
• Annotated Bibliography
• Seminal Authors
• Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
• How to Synthesize and Analyze
• Synthesis and Analysis Practice
• Synthesis and Analysis Group Sessions
• Problem Statement
• Purpose Statement
• Conceptual Framework
• Theoretical Framework
• Locating Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks This link opens in a new window
• Quantitative Research Questions

Qualitative Research Questions

• Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data
• Analysis and Coding Example- Qualitative Data
• Thematic Data Analysis in Qualitative Design
• Dissertation to Journal Article This link opens in a new window
• International Journal of Online Graduate Education (IJOGE) This link opens in a new window
• Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning (JRIT&L) This link opens in a new window

What’s in a Qualitative Research Question?

Qualitative research questions are driven by the need for the study. Ideally, research questions are formulated as a result of the problem and purpose, which leads to the identification of the methodology. When a qualitative methodology is chosen, research questions should be exploratory and focused on the actual phenomenon under study.

From the Dissertation Center, Chapter 1: Research Question Overview , there are several considerations when forming a qualitative research question. Qualitative research questions should

Below is an example of a qualitative phenomenological design. Note the use of the term “lived experience” in the central research question. This aligns with phenomenological design.

RQ1: “ What are the lived experiences of followers of mid-level managers in the financial services sector regarding their well-being on the job?”

If the researcher wants to focus on aspects of the theory used to support the study or dive deeper into aspects of the central RQ, sub-questions might be used. The following sub-questions could be formulated to seek further insight:

RQ1a.   “How do followers perceive the quality and adequacy of the leader-follower exchanges between themselves and their novice leaders?”

RQ1b.  “Under what conditions do leader-member exchanges affect a follower’s own level of well-being?”

Qualitative research questions also display the desire to explore or describe phenomena. Qualitative research seeks the lived experience, the personal experiences, the understandings, the meanings, and the stories associated with the concepts present in our studies.

We want to ensure our research questions are answerable and that we are not making assumptions about our sample. View the questions below:

How do healthcare providers perceive income inequality when providing care to poor patients?

In Example A, we see that there is no specificity of location or geographic areas. This could lead to findings that are varied, and the researcher may not find a clear pattern. Additionally, the question implies the focus is on “income inequality” when the actual focus is on the provision of care. The term “poor patients” can also be offensive, and most providers will not want to seem insensitive and may perceive income inequality as a challenge (of course!).

How do primary care nurses in outreach clinics describe providing quality care to residents of low-income urban neighborhoods?

In Example B, we see that there is greater specificity in the type of care provider. There is also a shift in language so that the focus is on how the individuals describe what they think about, experience, and navigate providing quality care.

Other Qualitative Research Question Examples

Vague : What are the strategies used by healthcare personnel to assist injured patients?

Try this : What is the experience of emergency room personnel in treating patients with a self-inflicted household injury?

The first question is general and vague. While in the same topic area, the second question is more precise and gives the reader a specific target population and a focus on the phenomenon they would have experienced. This question could be in line with a phenomenological study as we are seeking their experience or a case study as the ER personnel are a bounded entity.

Unclear : How do students experience progressing to college?

Try this : How do first-generation community members describe the aspects of their culture that promote aspiration to postsecondary education?

The first question does not have a focus on what progress is or what students are the focus. The second question provides a specific target population and provides the description to be provided by the participants. This question could be in line with a descriptive study.

• << Previous: Quantitative Research Questions
• Next: Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data >>
• Last Updated: Sep 7, 2024 9:42 AM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/researchtools

Research Question Generator: Best Tool for Students

Stuck formulating a research question? Try the tool we’ve made! With our research question generator, you’ll get a list of ideas for an academic assignment of any level. All you need to do is add the keywords you’re interested in, push the button, and enjoy the result!

Now, here comes your inspiration 😃

Please try again with some different keywords.

Why Use Research Question Generator?

The choice of research topic is a vital step in the process of any academic task completion. Whether you’re working on a small essay or a large dissertation, your topic will make it fail or fly. The best way to cope with the naming task and proceed to the writing part is to use our free online tool for title generation. Its benefits are indisputable.

• The tool generates research questions, not just topics
• It makes questions focused on your field of interest
• It’s free and quick in use

Research Question Generator: How to Use

Using our research question generator tool, you won’t need to crack your brains over this part of the writing assignment anymore. All you need to do is:

• Insert your study topic of interest in the relevant tab
• Choose a subject and click “Generate topics”
• Grab one of the offered options on the list

The results will be preliminary; you should use them as an initial reference point and refine them further for a workable, correctly formulated research question.

Research Questions: Types & Examples

Depending on your type of study (quantitative vs. qualitative), you might need to formulate different research question types. For instance, a typical quantitative research project would need a quantitative research question, which can be created with the following formula:

Variable(s) + object that possesses that variable + socio-demographic characteristics

You can choose among three quantitative research question types: descriptive, comparative, and relationship-based. Let's consider each type in more detail to clarify the practical side of question formulation.

Descriptive

As its name suggests, a descriptive research question inquires about the number, frequency, or intensity of something and aims to describe a quantitative issue. Some examples include:

• How often do people download personal finance apps in 2022?
• How regularly do Americans go on holidays abroad?
• How many subscriptions for paid learning resources do UK students make a year?

Comparative

Comparative research questions presuppose comparing and contrasting things within a research study. You should pick two or more objects, select a criterion for comparison, and discuss it in detail. Here are good examples:

• What is the difference in calorie intake between Japanese and American preschoolers?
• Does male and female social media use duration per day differ in the USA?
• What are the attitudes of Baby Boomers versus Millennials to freelance work?

Relationship-based

Relationship-based research is a bit more complex, so you'll need extra work to formulate a good research question. Here, you should single out:

• The independent variable
• The dependent variable
• The socio-demographics of your population of interest

Let’s illustrate how it works:

• How does the socio-economic status affect schoolchildren’s dropout rates in the UK?
• What is the relationship between screen time and obesity among American preschoolers?

Research Question Maker FAQ

In a nutshell, a research question is the one you set to answer by performing a specific academic study. Thus, for instance, if your research question is, “How did global warming affect bird migration in California?," you will study bird migration patterns concerning global warming dynamics.

You should think about the population affected by your topic, the specific aspect of your concern, and the timing/historical period you want to study. It’s also necessary to specify the location – a specific country, company, industry sector, the whole world, etc.

A great, effective research question should answer the "who, what, when, where" questions. In other words, you should define the subject of interest, the issue of your concern related to that subject, the timeframe, and the location of your study.

If you don’t know how to write a compelling research question, use our automated tool to complete the task in seconds. You only need to insert your subject of interest, and smart algorithms will do the rest, presenting a set of workable, interesting question suggestions.

• Boston University Libraries

Open Access for Social Work Research

• Subject Guides for Your Research
• Directories and Indexes

Subject Guides at BU

Librarians across disciplines update and maintain a variety of Library Guides which focus on disciplinary approaches or specific subjects. A full list of these guides is available here:  https://library.bu.edu/guides/ . 

The primary Social Work Library Guide is available here.

Library Guides for Social Work

The Library has created discipline and topic focused library guides to assist you in your research. This includes relevant databases, critical books, and other resources which can be useful in investigating your research topic. Some primary library guides for researching in social work are:

• Abortion, Contraception, and Reproductive Rights by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 672 views this year
• Aging by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 62 views this year
• APA Citations (7th edition) by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 12, 2024 404 views this year
• Boston Data and Statistics by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 1144 views this year
• Children, Youth, and Families by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 21 views this year
• Course Reserves for the School of Social Work by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 11, 2024 69 views this year
• Databases for Social Work Research by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 12, 2024 9 views this year
• Death and Dying by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 184 views this year
• Food Justice by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 624 views this year
• Housing and Homelessness by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 0 views this year
• Immigration by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 359 views this year
• Library Resources and Services for Social Work Faculty and Instructors by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 140 views this year
• Literature Reviews in Social Work by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 682 views this year
• Music Therapy by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 363 views this year
• Open Access for Social Work Research by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 16, 2024 0 views this year
• People-First Communication by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 6, 2024 29 views this year
• Psychology & Brain Sciences by Kate Silfen Last Updated Aug 12, 2024 662 views this year
• Race and Justice by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 45 views this year
• Social Work by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 1955 views this year
• Social Work Policy by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 499 views this year
• Substance Use and Dependence by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 102 views this year
• Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 12, 2024 1270 views this year
• Tests and Measures by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 12, 2024 25 views this year
• Youth Justice by Lucy Flamm Last Updated Sep 17, 2024 51 views this year

• << Previous: Journals
• Next: Get Help >>
• Last Updated: Sep 16, 2024 2:56 PM
• URL: https://library.bu.edu/c.php?g=1425086

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln

• < Previous Dissertation

Home > gradstudies > UNL Dissertations > 208

Graduate Studies

Dissertations and Doctoral Documents from University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2023–

Fighting racism and hate: a case study of black graduate students' perceptions of a university president's responses to racialized incidents.

Kaleb L. Briscoe , University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow

0000-0002-6333-9867

First Advisor

Deryl K. Hatch-Tocaimaza

Committee Members

Christina W. Yao, Stephanie Bondi, Sydney Freeman, Jr., Amanda Morales

Educational Studies (Educational Leadership and Higher Education)

Date of this Version

Document type.

Dissertation

A dissertation presented to the faculty of the Graduate College at the University of nebraska in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Major: Educational Studies (Educational Leadership and Higher Education)

Under the supervision of Professor Deryl K. Hatch-Tocaimaza

Lincoln, Nebraska, February 2020

Copyright 2020, Kaleb L. Briscoe.Used by permission

This qualitative, single case study examined Black graduate students’ perceptions of a university president’s responses to racialized incidents and how these perceptions inform Black graduate students’ larger contextual understanding of campus racial climate. Guided by Hurtado et al.’s (2012) Multi-Contextual Model for Diverse Learning Environments, the research questions were: What are Black graduate students’ perceptions of a university president’s responses to racialized incidents at a PWI? How do Black graduate students’ perceptions of a university president’s responses to racialized incidents inform their larger contextual understanding of campus racial climate at a PWI? Data was analyzed on an institutional-level through institutional documents, president statements, and one, 60 minute interview with 4 staff members and on an individual-level through a demographic survey and two, 60-90 minute interviews with 12 Black graduate students from a large, predominantly White institution in the Mid-Atlantic, the University of Maryland.

The findings were displayed through narrative summaries. As a result of the president’s responses to racialized incidents, Black graduate students felt othered, marginalized, and silenced. Findings demonstrated the lack of institutional response strategies that the president of University of Maryland used to address racialized incidents. Overall, participants viewed the president’s responses to racialized incidents as being untimely, inadequate, and inappropriate. Almost all students and staff participants shared that the president’s responses to racialized incidents through campus statements used non-performative and anti-Blackness rhetoric. Black graduate students reported that the president’s responses, from their vantage point, lacked action-oriented language, next steps, and strategies to assist them during the aftermath of the incidents.

The findings from this study underscored a direct connection between the president’s responses to racialized incidents and how Black graduate students at one campus perceive racial climate as being negative. This further illustrates the significance of the role of the presidency when addressing issues of race and racism, and how their responses have the power to disrupt or harm both the personal lived experiences of individuals and the broader campus racial climate for Black graduate students. Several implications for practice and recommendations for theory and future research are offered.

Recommended Citation

Briscoe, Kaleb L., "Fighting Racism and Hate: A Case Study of Black Graduate Students' Perceptions of a University President's Responses to Racialized Incidents" (2020). Dissertations and Doctoral Documents from University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2023– . 208. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissunl/208

Since September 16, 2024

Included in

Educational Sociology Commons , Higher Education Commons , Inequality and Stratification Commons , Leadership Studies Commons , Race and Ethnicity Commons , Race, Ethnicity and Post-Colonial Studies Commons

Advanced Search

Search Help

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Administrator Resources
• How to Cite Items From This Repository
• Copyright Information
• Collections
• Disciplines

Author Corner

• Guide to Submitting
• gradstudies Website

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Search form

Research Proposal and Thesis Format

This is a written presentation of an intended research specifying the problem, the purpose, scope/objectives, methodology, references and the financial plan/budget. A synopsis is an outline of the research proposal of 3-5 pages length (including references) which is currently required for provisional admission to Ph.D and other doctoral degree studies at Makerere University.

Dissertation Structure & Layout 101: How to structure your dissertation, thesis or research project.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) Reviewed By: David Phair (PhD) | July 2019

So, you’ve got a decent understanding of what a dissertation is , you’ve chosen your topic and hopefully you’ve received approval for your research proposal . Awesome! Now its time to start the actual dissertation or thesis writing journey.

To craft a high-quality document, the very first thing you need to understand is dissertation structure . In this post, we’ll walk you through the generic dissertation structure and layout, step by step. We’ll start with the big picture, and then zoom into each chapter to briefly discuss the core contents. If you’re just starting out on your research journey, you should start with this post, which covers the big-picture process of how to write a dissertation or thesis .

*The Caveat *

In this post, we’ll be discussing a traditional dissertation/thesis structure and layout, which is generally used for social science research across universities, whether in the US, UK, Europe or Australia. However, some universities may have small variations on this structure (extra chapters, merged chapters, slightly different ordering, etc).

So, always check with your university if they have a prescribed structure or layout that they expect you to work with. If not, it’s safe to assume the structure we’ll discuss here is suitable. And even if they do have a prescribed structure, you’ll still get value from this post as we’ll explain the core contents of each section.  

Overview: S tructuring a dissertation or thesis

• Acknowledgements page
• Abstract (or executive summary)
• Table of contents , list of figures and tables
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: Literature review
• Chapter 3: Methodology
• Chapter 4: Results
• Chapter 5: Discussion
• Chapter 6: Conclusion
• Reference list

As I mentioned, some universities will have slight variations on this structure. For example, they want an additional “personal reflection chapter”, or they might prefer the results and discussion chapter to be merged into one. Regardless, the overarching flow will always be the same, as this flow reflects the research process , which we discussed here – i.e.:

• The introduction chapter presents the core research question and aims .
• The literature review chapter assesses what the current research says about this question.
• The methodology, results and discussion chapters go about undertaking new research about this question.
• The conclusion chapter (attempts to) answer the core research question .

In other words, the dissertation structure and layout reflect the research process of asking a well-defined question(s), investigating, and then answering the question – see below.

To restate that – the structure and layout of a dissertation reflect the flow of the overall research process . This is essential to understand, as each chapter will make a lot more sense if you “get” this concept. If you’re not familiar with the research process, read this post before going further.

Right. Now that we’ve covered the big picture, let’s dive a little deeper into the details of each section and chapter. Oh and by the way, you can also grab our free dissertation/thesis template here to help speed things up.

The title page of your dissertation is the very first impression the marker will get of your work, so it pays to invest some time thinking about your title. But what makes for a good title? A strong title needs to be 3 things:

• Succinct (not overly lengthy or verbose)
• Specific (not vague or ambiguous)
• Representative of the research you’re undertaking (clearly linked to your research questions)

Typically, a good title includes mention of the following:

• The broader area of the research (i.e. the overarching topic)
• The specific focus of your research (i.e. your specific context)
• Indication of research design (e.g. quantitative , qualitative , or  mixed methods ).

For example:

A quantitative investigation [research design] into the antecedents of organisational trust [broader area] in the UK retail forex trading market [specific context/area of focus].

Again, some universities may have specific requirements regarding the format and structure of the title, so it’s worth double-checking expectations with your institution (if there’s no mention in the brief or study material).

Acknowledgements

This page provides you with an opportunity to say thank you to those who helped you along your research journey. Generally, it’s optional (and won’t count towards your marks), but it is academic best practice to include this.

So, who do you say thanks to? Well, there’s no prescribed requirements, but it’s common to mention the following people:

• Your dissertation supervisor or committee.
• Any professors, lecturers or academics that helped you understand the topic or methodologies.
• Any tutors, mentors or advisors.
• Your family and friends, especially spouse (for adult learners studying part-time).

There’s no need for lengthy rambling. Just state who you’re thankful to and for what (e.g. thank you to my supervisor, John Doe, for his endless patience and attentiveness) – be sincere. In terms of length, you should keep this to a page or less.

Abstract or executive summary

The dissertation abstract (or executive summary for some degrees) serves to provide the first-time reader (and marker or moderator) with a big-picture view of your research project. It should give them an understanding of the key insights and findings from the research, without them needing to read the rest of the report – in other words, it should be able to stand alone .

For it to stand alone, your abstract should cover the following key points (at a minimum):

• Your research questions and aims – what key question(s) did your research aim to answer?
• Your methodology – how did you go about investigating the topic and finding answers to your research question(s)?
• Your findings – following your own research, what did do you discover?
• Your conclusions – based on your findings, what conclusions did you draw? What answers did you find to your research question(s)?

So, in much the same way the dissertation structure mimics the research process, your abstract or executive summary should reflect the research process, from the initial stage of asking the original question to the final stage of answering that question.

In practical terms, it’s a good idea to write this section up last , once all your core chapters are complete. Otherwise, you’ll end up writing and rewriting this section multiple times (just wasting time). For a step by step guide on how to write a strong executive summary, check out this post .

Need a helping hand?

Table of contents

This section is straightforward. You’ll typically present your table of contents (TOC) first, followed by the two lists – figures and tables. I recommend that you use Microsoft Word’s automatic table of contents generator to generate your TOC. If you’re not familiar with this functionality, the video below explains it simply:

If you find that your table of contents is overly lengthy, consider removing one level of depth. Oftentimes, this can be done without detracting from the usefulness of the TOC.

Right, now that the “admin” sections are out of the way, its time to move on to your core chapters. These chapters are the heart of your dissertation and are where you’ll earn the marks. The first chapter is the introduction chapter – as you would expect, this is the time to introduce your research…

It’s important to understand that even though you’ve provided an overview of your research in your abstract, your introduction needs to be written as if the reader has not read that (remember, the abstract is essentially a standalone document). So, your introduction chapter needs to start from the very beginning, and should address the following questions:

• What will you be investigating (in plain-language, big picture-level)?
• Why is that worth investigating? How is it important to academia or business? How is it sufficiently original?
• What are your research aims and research question(s)? Note that the research questions can sometimes be presented at the end of the literature review (next chapter).
• What is the scope of your study? In other words, what will and won’t you cover ?
• How will you approach your research? In other words, what methodology will you adopt?
• How will you structure your dissertation? What are the core chapters and what will you do in each of them?

These are just the bare basic requirements for your intro chapter. Some universities will want additional bells and whistles in the intro chapter, so be sure to carefully read your brief or consult your research supervisor.

If done right, your introduction chapter will set a clear direction for the rest of your dissertation. Specifically, it will make it clear to the reader (and marker) exactly what you’ll be investigating, why that’s important, and how you’ll be going about the investigation. Conversely, if your introduction chapter leaves a first-time reader wondering what exactly you’ll be researching, you’ve still got some work to do.

Now that you’ve set a clear direction with your introduction chapter, the next step is the literature review . In this section, you will analyse the existing research (typically academic journal articles and high-quality industry publications), with a view to understanding the following questions:

• What does the literature currently say about the topic you’re investigating?
• Is the literature lacking or well established? Is it divided or in disagreement?
• How does your research fit into the bigger picture?
• How does your research contribute something original?
• How does the methodology of previous studies help you develop your own?

Depending on the nature of your study, you may also present a conceptual framework towards the end of your literature review, which you will then test in your actual research.

Again, some universities will want you to focus on some of these areas more than others, some will have additional or fewer requirements, and so on. Therefore, as always, its important to review your brief and/or discuss with your supervisor, so that you know exactly what’s expected of your literature review chapter.

Now that you’ve investigated the current state of knowledge in your literature review chapter and are familiar with the existing key theories, models and frameworks, its time to design your own research. Enter the methodology chapter – the most “science-ey” of the chapters…

In this chapter, you need to address two critical questions:

• Exactly HOW will you carry out your research (i.e. what is your intended research design)?
• Exactly WHY have you chosen to do things this way (i.e. how do you justify your design)?

Remember, the dissertation part of your degree is first and foremost about developing and demonstrating research skills . Therefore, the markers want to see that you know which methods to use, can clearly articulate why you’ve chosen then, and know how to deploy them effectively.

Importantly, this chapter requires detail – don’t hold back on the specifics. State exactly what you’ll be doing, with who, when, for how long, etc. Moreover, for every design choice you make, make sure you justify it.

In practice, you will likely end up coming back to this chapter once you’ve undertaken all your data collection and analysis, and revise it based on changes you made during the analysis phase. This is perfectly fine. Its natural for you to add an additional analysis technique, scrap an old one, etc based on where your data lead you. Of course, I’m talking about small changes here – not a fundamental switch from qualitative to quantitative, which will likely send your supervisor in a spin!

You’ve now collected your data and undertaken your analysis, whether qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods. In this chapter, you’ll present the raw results of your analysis . For example, in the case of a quant study, you’ll present the demographic data, descriptive statistics, inferential statistics , etc.

Typically, Chapter 4 is simply a presentation and description of the data, not a discussion of the meaning of the data. In other words, it’s descriptive, rather than analytical – the meaning is discussed in Chapter 5. However, some universities will want you to combine chapters 4 and 5, so that you both present and interpret the meaning of the data at the same time. Check with your institution what their preference is.

Now that you’ve presented the data analysis results, its time to interpret and analyse them. In other words, its time to discuss what they mean, especially in relation to your research question(s).

What you discuss here will depend largely on your chosen methodology. For example, if you’ve gone the quantitative route, you might discuss the relationships between variables . If you’ve gone the qualitative route, you might discuss key themes and the meanings thereof. It all depends on what your research design choices were.

Most importantly, you need to discuss your results in relation to your research questions and aims, as well as the existing literature. What do the results tell you about your research questions? Are they aligned with the existing research or at odds? If so, why might this be? Dig deep into your findings and explain what the findings suggest, in plain English.

The final chapter – you’ve made it! Now that you’ve discussed your interpretation of the results, its time to bring it back to the beginning with the conclusion chapter . In other words, its time to (attempt to) answer your original research question s (from way back in chapter 1). Clearly state what your conclusions are in terms of your research questions. This might feel a bit repetitive, as you would have touched on this in the previous chapter, but its important to bring the discussion full circle and explicitly state your answer(s) to the research question(s).

Next, you’ll typically discuss the implications of your findings . In other words, you’ve answered your research questions – but what does this mean for the real world (or even for academia)? What should now be done differently, given the new insight you’ve generated?

Lastly, you should discuss the limitations of your research, as well as what this means for future research in the area. No study is perfect, especially not a Masters-level. Discuss the shortcomings of your research. Perhaps your methodology was limited, perhaps your sample size was small or not representative, etc, etc. Don’t be afraid to critique your work – the markers want to see that you can identify the limitations of your work. This is a strength, not a weakness. Be brutal!

This marks the end of your core chapters – woohoo! From here on out, it’s pretty smooth sailing.

The reference list is straightforward. It should contain a list of all resources cited in your dissertation, in the required format, e.g. APA , Harvard, etc.

It’s essential that you use reference management software for your dissertation. Do NOT try handle your referencing manually – its far too error prone. On a reference list of multiple pages, you’re going to make mistake. To this end, I suggest considering either Mendeley or Zotero. Both are free and provide a very straightforward interface to ensure that your referencing is 100% on point. I’ve included a simple how-to video for the Mendeley software (my personal favourite) below:

Some universities may ask you to include a bibliography, as opposed to a reference list. These two things are not the same . A bibliography is similar to a reference list, except that it also includes resources which informed your thinking but were not directly cited in your dissertation. So, double-check your brief and make sure you use the right one.

The very last piece of the puzzle is the appendix or set of appendices. This is where you’ll include any supporting data and evidence. Importantly, supporting is the keyword here.

Your appendices should provide additional “nice to know”, depth-adding information, which is not critical to the core analysis. Appendices should not be used as a way to cut down word count (see this post which covers how to reduce word count ). In other words, don’t place content that is critical to the core analysis here, just to save word count. You will not earn marks on any content in the appendices, so don’t try to play the system!

Time to recap…

And there you have it – the traditional dissertation structure and layout, from A-Z. To recap, the core structure for a dissertation or thesis is (typically) as follows:

• Acknowledgments page

Most importantly, the core chapters should reflect the research process (asking, investigating and answering your research question). Moreover, the research question(s) should form the golden thread throughout your dissertation structure. Everything should revolve around the research questions, and as you’ve seen, they should form both the start point (i.e. introduction chapter) and the endpoint (i.e. conclusion chapter).

I hope this post has provided you with clarity about the traditional dissertation/thesis structure and layout. If you have any questions or comments, please leave a comment below, or feel free to get in touch with us. Also, be sure to check out the rest of the  Grad Coach Blog .

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

36 Comments

many thanks i found it very useful

Glad to hear that, Arun. Good luck writing your dissertation.

Such clear practical logical advice. I very much needed to read this to keep me focused in stead of fretting.. Perfect now ready to start my research!

what about scientific fields like computer or engineering thesis what is the difference in the structure? thank you very much

Thanks so much this helped me a lot!

Very helpful and accessible. What I like most is how practical the advice is along with helpful tools/ links.

Thanks Ade!

Thank you so much sir.. It was really helpful..

You’re welcome!

Hi! How many words maximum should contain the abstract?

Thank you so much 😊 Find this at the right moment

You’re most welcome. Good luck with your dissertation.

best ever benefit i got on right time thank you

Many times Clarity and vision of destination of dissertation is what makes the difference between good ,average and great researchers the same way a great automobile driver is fast with clarity of address and Clear weather conditions .

I guess Great researcher = great ideas + knowledge + great and fast data collection and modeling + great writing + high clarity on all these

You have given immense clarity from start to end.

Morning. Where will I write the definitions of what I’m referring to in my report?

Thank you so much Derek, I was almost lost! Thanks a tonnnn! Have a great day!

Thanks ! so concise and valuable

This was very helpful. Clear and concise. I know exactly what to do now.

Thank you for allowing me to go through briefly. I hope to find time to continue.

Really useful to me. Thanks a thousand times

Very interesting! It will definitely set me and many more for success. highly recommended.

Thank you soo much sir, for the opportunity to express my skills

Usefull, thanks a lot. Really clear

Very nice and easy to understand. Thank you .

That was incredibly useful. Thanks Grad Coach Crew!

My stress level just dropped at least 15 points after watching this. Just starting my thesis for my grad program and I feel a lot more capable now! Thanks for such a clear and helpful video, Emma and the GradCoach team!

Do we need to mention the number of words the dissertation contains in the main document?

It depends on your university’s requirements, so it would be best to check with them 🙂

Such a helpful post to help me get started with structuring my masters dissertation, thank you!

Great video; I appreciate that helpful information

It is so necessary or avital course

This blog is very informative for my research. Thank you

Doctoral students are required to fill out the National Research Council’s Survey of Earned Doctorates

wow this is an amazing gain in my life

This is so good

How can i arrange my specific objectives in my dissertation?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

• What Is A Literature Review (In A Dissertation Or Thesis) - Grad Coach - […] is to write the actual literature review chapter (this is usually the second chapter in a typical dissertation or…

Submit a Comment 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.

• Print Friendly

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Active funding opportunity

Nsf 24-605: cultural anthropology program - doctoral dissertation research improvement grants (ca-ddrig), program solicitation, document information, document history.

• Posted: September 12, 2024
• Replaces: NSF 23-502

Program Solicitation NSF 24-605

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization's local time):

     January 15, 2025

     January 15, Annually Thereafter

     August 15, 2025

     August 15, Annually Thereafter

Important Information And Revision Notes

• This solicitation provides instructions for preparation of proposals submitted to the Cultural Anthropology Program (CA) for Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grants (DDRIG).
• This revision replaces target dates with deadlines.
• This revision eliminates the requirement that if the proposal is a resubmission, the first paragraph of the project description must summarize how the proposal has responded to previous reviewer concerns.
• This revision does not alter the restriction that a DDRIG proposal may only be re-submitted once without a waiver for an additional submission.
• This revision reaffirms the explanation of NSF's mission to support fundamental research, rather than applied research, or descriptive ethnographic work with primarily humanistic or philosophical objectives, or non-generalizable data collection centered on describing a particular ethnographic site or sites.
• The revision includes additional budgetary guidance.
• Additional solicitation-specific guidelines are described in the proposal preparation and submission instructions below. Failure to comply with the CA-DDRIG solicitation-specific instructions may result in a proposal being returned without review.

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is regularly revised and it is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements specified in this solicitation and the applicable version of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General information.

Program Title:

Cultural Anthropology Program - Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grants (CA-DDRIG)

The primary objective of the Cultural Anthropology Program is to support basic scientific research on the causes, consequences and complexities of human social and cultural variability. Contemporary cultural anthropology is an arena in which diverse research traditions and methodologies are valid in investigations of human cultural variation. Recognizing the breadth of the field's contributions to science, the Cultural Anthropology Program welcomes proposals for empirically grounded, fieldwork/lab-based theoretically engaged and methodologically sophisticated research in all sub-fields of cultural anthropology. Because the National Science Foundation's mission is to support basic research, the NSF Cultural Anthropology Program does not fund research that takes as its primary goal improved clinical practice, humanistic understanding or applied policy. A proposal that applies anthropological methods to a social problem but does not propose how that problem provides an opportunity to make a theory-testing and/or theory-expanding contribution to anthropology will be returned without review. Program research priorities include, but are not limited to, research that increases our understanding of: Sociocultural drivers of critical anthropogenic processes such as deforestation, desertification, land cover change, urbanization and poverty. Resilience and robustness of sociocultural systems. Scientific principles underlying conflict, cooperation and altruism, as well as explanations of variation in culture, norms, behaviors and institutions. Economy, culture, migration and globalization. Variability and change in kinship and family norms and practices. General cultural and social principles underlining the drivers of health outcomes and disease transmission. Biocultural work that considers the nexus of human culture and its relationship with human biology. Social regulation, governmentality and violence. Origins of complexity in sociocultural systems. Language and culture: orality and literacy, sociolinguistics and cognition. Theoretically-informed approaches to co-production in relation to scientific understandings of human variability and environmental stewardship. Mathematical and computational models of sociocultural systems such as social network analysis, agent-based models, multi-level models, and modes that integrate agent-based simulations and geographic information systems (GIS). Socio-cultural drivers of technology and technological systems such as AI, machine learning, augmented data, and platforms. As part of its effort to encourage and support projects that explicitly integrate education and basic research, CA provides support to enhance and improve the conduct of doctoral dissertation projects designed and carried out by doctoral students enrolled in U.S. institutions of higher education who are conducting scientific research that enhances basic scientific knowledge.

Broadening Participation In STEM

NSF recognizes the unique lived experiences of individuals from communities that are underrepresented and/or under-served in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and the barriers to inclusion and access to STEM education and careers. NSF highly encourages the leadership, partnership, and contributions in all NSF opportunities of individuals who are members of such communities supported by NSF. This includes leading and designing STEM research and education proposals for funding; serving as peer reviewers, advisory committee members, and/or committee of visitor members; and serving as NSF leadership, program, and/or administrative staff. NSF also highly encourages demographically diverse institutions of higher education (IHEs) to lead, partner, and contribute to NSF opportunities on behalf of their research and education communities. NSF expects that all individuals, including those who are members of groups that are underrepresented and/or under-served in STEM, are treated equitably and inclusively in the Foundation's proposal and award process.

NSF encourages IHEs that enroll, educate, graduate, and employ individuals who are members of groups underrepresented and/or under-served in STEM education programs and careers to lead, partner, and contribute to NSF opportunities, including leading and designing STEM research and education proposals for funding. Such IHEs include, but may not be limited to, community colleges and two-year institutions, mission-based institutions such as Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), women's colleges, and institutions that primarily serve persons with disabilities, as well as institutions defined by enrollment such as Predominantly Undergraduate Institutions (PUIs), Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs), and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs).

"Broadening participation in STEM" is the comprehensive phrase used by NSF to refer to the Foundation's goal of increasing the representation and diversity of individuals, organizations, and geographic regions that contribute to STEM teaching, research, and innovation. To broaden participation in STEM, it is necessary to address issues of equity, inclusion, and access in STEM education, training, and careers. Whereas all NSF programs might support broadening participation components, some programs primarily focus on supporting broadening participation research and projects. Examples can be found on the NSF Broadening Participation in STEM website.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

• Jeffrey Mantz, Program Director, W13148, telephone: (703) 292-7783, email: [email protected]
• Tarini Bedi, Program Director, telephone: (703) 292-8740, email: [email protected]
• Jeremy Koster, Program Director, telephone: (703) 292-8740, email: [email protected]
• Brittiney Cleveland, Program Specialist, telephone: (703) 292-4634, email: [email protected]
• 47.075 --- Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant

Estimated Number of Awards: 40 to 50

During a fiscal year, Cultural Anthropology expects to recommend (either on its own or jointly with one or more other NSF programs) a total of 40-50 doctoral dissertation research improvement (DDRIG) awards.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $800,000

Anticipated Funding Amount is $800,000 pending availability of funds. Project budgets should be developed at scales appropriate for the work to be conducted. The total direct costs for CA DDRIG awards may not exceed $25,000; applicable indirect costs are in addition to (that is, on top of) that amount.

The proposer may concurrently submit a doctoral dissertation proposal to other funding organizations. Please indicate this in the "Current and Pending (Other) Support" section of the NSF proposal, so that NSF may coordinate funding with the other organizations. The "Current and Pending (Other) Support" section of the NSF proposal should also list the submitted NSF proposal itself. The proposer may submit a DDRIG proposal to only one NSF program although they may request that the proposal be co-reviewed with one or more other NSF programs; actual co-review will be at the discretion of the relevant program officers.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of sub-awards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus. Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research laboratories, professional societies and similar organizations located in the U.S. that are directly associated with educational or research activities. Tribal Nations: An American Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of the Interior acknowledges as a federally recognized tribe pursuant to the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. §§ 5130-5131.

Who May Serve as PI:

The proposal must be submitted through regular organizational channels by the dissertation advisor(s) on behalf of the graduate student. The advisor is the principal investigator (PI); the student is the co-principal investigator (co-PI). The student must be the author of the proposal. The student must be enrolled at a U.S. institution, but need not be a U.S. citizen. To be eligible to serve as the PI, the advisor must be available during the period of submission, review, and performance of the research to relay information and communications from NSF to the student.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI:

There are no limitations on the number of DDRIGs that may be submitted by an organization on behalf of a single faculty member during a specific competition or over the course of their career. But an organization may submit only two proposals (an original submission and if necessary a resubmission) for a particular student over the student's career, barring special dispensation from the Cultural Anthropology Program for an additional resubmission. Such dispensations are exclusively at the discretion of the CA Program Officer(s). A student and their advisor therefore should carefully consider at what point during the student's graduate program the student is ready to submit a DDRIG proposal, keeping in mind that proposal processing normally takes approximately six months.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. proposal preparation instructions.

• Letters of Intent: Not required
• Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required
• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply. The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .
• Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide s available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ).

B. Budgetary Information

C. due dates, proposal review information criteria.

Merit Review Criteria:

National Science Board approved criteria apply.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

Standard NSF award conditions apply.

Reporting Requirements:

Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

I. Introduction

The Cultural Anthropology Program awards Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grants (DDRIGs) in all areas of cultural anthropological science supported by the program. The primary objective of the Cultural Anthropology Program is to support basic scientific research on the causes, consequences and complexities of human social and cultural variability. DDRIGs support the development of the next generation of cultural anthropologists to pursue those questions.

Contemporary cultural anthropology is an arena in which diverse research traditions and methodologies are valid in investigations of human cultural variation. Recognizing the breadth of the field's contributions to science and its methodological variety, the Cultural Anthropology Program welcomes proposals for empirically grounded, theoretically engaged and methodologically sophisticated research in all sub-fields of cultural anthropology. Because the National Science Foundation's mission is to support basic research, the NSF Cultural Anthropology Program does not fund research that takes as its primary goal improved clinical practice, humanistic or philosophical understanding or applied policy. Program research priorities include, but are not limited to, research that increases our understanding of:

• Sociocultural drivers of critical anthropogenic processes such as deforestation, desertification, land cover change, urbanization and poverty.
• Resilience and robustness of sociocultural systems.
• Scientific principles underlying conflict, cooperation and altruism, as well as explanations of variation in culture, norms, behaviors and institutions.
• Economy, culture, migration and globalization.
• Variability and change in kinship and family norms and practices.
• General cultural and social principles underlining the drivers of health outcomes and disease transmission.
• Biocultural work that considers the nexus of human culture and its relationship with human biology.
• Social regulation, governmentality and violence.
• Origins of complexity in sociocultural systems.
• Language and culture: orality and literacy, sociolinguistics and cognition.
• Theoretically informed approaches to co-production in relation to scientific understandings of human variability and environmental stewardship.
• Mathematical and computational models of sociocultural systems such as social network analysis, agent-based models, multi-level models, and modes that integrate agent-based simulations and geographic information systems (GIS).
• Socio-cultural drivers of technology and technological systems such as AI, machine learning, augmented data, and platforms.

II. Program Description

CA Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grants provide funds for items not usually available from the student's U.S. academic institution. The awards are not intended to provide the full costs of a student's doctoral dissertation research or to replace support for a student's program of graduate study that is typically provided by the student's institution. Funds may be used for valid research expenses. The funds may not be used for post-field research writing, analysis and thesis production costs. Funds may not be used for stipends, tuition or the purchase of textbooks or journals. Further details concerning allowable as well as non-allowable expenses can be found in the budgetary information section of this solicitation.

While NSF provides support for doctoral dissertation research, the student (co-PI) is solely responsible for the conduct of such research and preparation of results for publication. NSF, therefore, does not assume responsibility for such findings or their interpretation. This program does not support research with applied, disease-related goals, including research directly focused on the etiology, diagnosis or treatment of disease or dysfunction.

III. Award Information

The proposer may concurrently submit a doctoral dissertation proposal to other funding organizations. Please indicate this in the "Current and Pending (Other) Support" section of the NSF proposal, so that NSF may coordinate funding with the other organizations. The "Current and Pending (Other) Support" section of the NSF proposal should also list the proposal itself. The proposer may submit a DDRIG proposal to only one NSF program although they may request that the proposal be co-reviewed with one or more other NSF programs; actual co-review will be at the discretion of the relevant program officers.

Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

IV. Eligibility Information

V. proposal preparation and submission instructions.

Full Proposal Preparation Instructions : Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Research.gov or Grants.gov.

• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg . Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] . The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.
• Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov . The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: ( https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

See PAPPG Chapter II.C.2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

In addition to the guidelines in the PAPPG or NSF Grants.gov Application Guide, specific instructions for Cultural Anthropology (CA) Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant (DDRIG) proposals are:

Proposal Set-Up

Select "Prepare New Full Proposal" in Research.gov. Search for and select this solicitation title in Step 1 of the Full Proposal wizard. The information in Step 2, Where to Apply, will be pre-populated by the system. Select "Research" as the proposal type. In the proposal details section, select "Single proposal (with or without sub-awards). Separately submitted collaborative proposals will be returned without review. The project title must begin with "Doctoral Dissertation Research:". The title should be descriptive rather than clever. It should emphasize the generalizable science that the research will address, such as the main research question that the student aims to investigate.

You may select additional programs if you would like those programs to consider co-review of your proposal with Cultural Anthropology. After the proposal is created click on the 'Manage Where to Apply" link on the proposal main page. This will open the "Manage Where to Apply" page where additional programs can be selected. Note that a request for co-review should be made only when the PIs believe the proposed work makes a strong case for advancing theory and basic knowledge in multiple communities served by multiple programs and when the project description engages literature from those communities. Methods that are relevant to other programs are not sufficient to merit co-review; the contribution must be theoretical and scientific. Not all standing programs support the co-review of DDRIG proposals. You should verify that the proposed program is willing to co-review a DDRIG proposal.

Senior/Key Personnel

List the primary dissertation advisor as the "PI" and the student as the "co-PI."

Cover Sheet

• Mark human subjects as pending, approved or exempted.

Project Description

• This section is limited to 10 single-spaced pages of text.
• The "Results from Prior NSF Support" section is NOT required for DDRIG proposals.
• A statement of the research problem and its scientific importance, specific aims, questions or hypotheses. The research questions or hypotheses must be empirically driven. Arguments that are not subject to falsification via empirical discovery and data analysis will be returned without review. Projects that are motivated strictly by philosophical or humanistic questions, or that source information in service of a particular theoretical position (without putting that theoretical position at risk of falsification through data collection and analysis), will also be judged to be unsuitable for funding and returned without review.
• A section addressing intellectual merit (we recommend you clearly label it in a way that highlights the basic scientific value of the project, e.g., "intellectual merit," "scientific generalizability," or "scientific merit", rather than "literature review"). This section should describe the project's potential contribution to advancing anthropological theory beyond the site and context of the project itself. It should include a focused review of what is thought to be known about the topic of study and a clear statement of what the project's original contribution will be and why that contribution will be significant. Proposals that list areas of scholarship without reference to the specific means by which theory will be tested, queried or advanced are not sufficient. The project description must describe the project's potential contribution to advancing anthropological theory beyond the site and context of the project itself. Projects that are focused narrowly on the sociological or cultural context of a particular site that fail to frame the project in terms of a larger, generalizable set of questions will be returned without review.
• A section labeled broader impacts that discusses the broader impacts of the proposed activities and the pathways by which those broader impacts will be realized. Broader impacts are significant effects beyond basic science. They might include communicating results to policy makers, contributing to the knowledge base to solve an important social problem, engaging students of any age in the research enterprise, doing outreach to the public, producing databases that contribute to scientific infrastructure, strengthening international research collaborations, broadening the scientific participation of underrepresented communities, or strengthening research capacity in developing nations. Partisan activities explicitly related to advocacy and/or activism fall outside of of the statutory mission of the NSF and should not be included.
• A discussion of any preliminary studies performed by the student, the results of those studies and how they inform the project.
• An account of whether the student has the relevant technical training, language competence and other preparation necessary to make the project feasible. This must also include an explanation of how the student has obtained the relevant methodological training (at their institution or elsewhere) to conduct a scientific research project.
• A statement of steps taken to ensure objectivity given student positionality with respect to their research site(s), question(s) and hypotheses;
• A research design that includes a discussion of the research site(s) and source(s) of data, the methods by which data will be collected to answer the questions or test hypotheses posed by the proposal, and the reasons those methods are the most appropriate.
• A clear description of the systematic strategy that will be used to recruit research participants (i.e., sample design) and a justified estimate of the sample size necessary to achieve research objectives. Research sample design and estimates of sample size should be carefully described; the researcher should explain how these strategies mitigate sampling bias, omitted variables and confirmation biases.
• A well-developed data analysis plan (usually one page in length) that explains how the data will be systematically analyzed to address the specific research questions, aims or hypotheses posed within the proposal.
• A research schedule or timeline that includes the date that funds are required.

Budget and Budget Justification

• The budget justification pages should be used to detail and explain the rationale for each item requested.
• Travel expenses may include food and lodging as well as transportation while the researcher is living away from their normal place of residence. All travel expenses should be requested under "Travel - Domestic" or "Travel - Foreign."
• All other expenses should be requested under "Other Direct Costs."
• No items may be budgeted under "Consultants" or "Sub-awards". If casual or itinerant labor is being requested to assist in data collection activities (e.g., the hiring of local field assistants at a research site), this may be budgeted under "Other Direct Costs."
• Incentive payments to research participants to participate in the study should be budgeted under "Other Direct Costs." These should not be described as "gifts."
• Any software requested should be at academic pricing where available.
• Salaries or stipends for the graduate student or the advisor are not eligible for support. Therefore, after the PI and co-PI(s) are entered on the cover page, their names must be manually removed from the Senior/Key Personnel listing on the budget pages. This is to avoid construal as voluntary committed cost sharing, which is not permitted.

Facilities, Equipment & Other Resources

• If you have resources (such as a research awards from another sources) that will be used to supplement any NSF award, those resources must be listed here (rather than in the budget justification).

Data Management and Sharing Plan

A data management and sharing plan is required for all research proposals, and proposals that do not include one will not be able to be submitted. The plan should address the following questions:

• What kinds of data, software and other materials will your research produce?
• How will you manage them (e.g., standards for meta-data, format, organization, etc.)?
• How will you give other researchers access to your data, while preserving confidentiality, security, intellectual property and other rights and requirements?
• How will you archive data and preserve access in publicly accessible and institutionally maintained repositories in the short and the long term? (A departmental website is not dequate.)

PIs are encouraged to consult the American Anthropological Association's (AAA) Statement on Professional Ethics . PIs who plan to use a standard archive, such as the Qualitative Data Repository (QDR) at Syracuse University, the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) archive housed at the University of Michigan or the Harvard University Data-verse, are strongly advised to contact the archive before undertaking the research to ascertain any specific requirements for permissions or meta-data, which would require advance planning. The AAA maintains a wiki where researchers can identify where their data are archived or deposited. We recommend use of this facility to enhance data sharing.

Individuals with disabilities who need reasonable accommodations as part of the proposal process must contact the NSF Office of Equity and Civil Rights (OECR) at least 30 days prior to the proposal target date.

Supplementary Documentation

• Up to two pages of technical illustrations, maps, or sample survey questions may be included as a supplementary document.
• If the project's success depends on access to a non-public site (such as a clinic, Native American or Indigenous territory or business), PIs are advised to obtain a letter providing that access. This should not be an endorsement of the proposal. Please use this template:

To: NSF _________(Program Title)___________ Program From: ____________________________________ (Printed name of the individual collaborator or name of the organization and name and position of the official submitting this memo) By signing below (or transmitting electronically), we acknowledge that we are listed as providing resources, access or assistance for the project described in the proposal entitled. Barring unforeseen events, I/we agree to provide the access, resources or assistance as described in the project description of the proposal. Signed: _______________________ Organization: ________________________________ Date: _________________________ Letters of reference or evaluation are NOT allowed. The Cultural Anthropology Program does NOT require a letter from the department assessing the student's progress to degree.

Cost Sharing:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Budget Preparation Instructions:

Proposers may request up to $25,000 in direct costs and durations of up to 24 months. There are no indirect cost limitations; proposals submitted in response to this solicitation are subject to the awardee's current federally negotiated indirect cost rate. Indirect costs are in addition to (that is, on top of) the maximum direct cost request of up to $25,000. Project budgets should be developed at scales appropriate for the work to be conducted and may only include costs directly associated with the conduct of dissertation research. Please allow 6 to 8 months after the target date for an award to be made.

DDRIG awards provide funding for research costs not normally covered by the student's university. Expenses that may be included in a DDRIG proposal budget include:

• Costs associated with travel and related expenses (budgeted under Line E) to conduct research at field sites, archives, specialized collections or facilities away from the student's campus.
• Costs for data collection activities.
• Costs for modest field equipment (e.g., laptops; photo, video or audio equipment), and materials and supplies (usually budgeted under Line G1) necessary for the conduct of the project that will be devoted to the project over the duration of the award. (Note that any equipment purchased with NSF funds becomes property of the awardee organization.) Costs should be based on appropriateness to the scientific need of the study and current market prices. Top-of-the-line equipment is generally not funded unless there is a specific and well-justified explanation as to why standard equipment will not suffice.
• NOT ALLOWABLE: donation of books to a needy school or gifts simply because it is cultural custom.
• ALLOWABLE: purchase of books needed to perform a study that will take place at a school, incentives (including pre-paid gift cards) for participation in a study that would likely not be able to be completed without incentives (e.g., a very long survey to fill out, a study that requires multiple follow-up sessions, medical testing, etc.), subject payments for survey respondents.
• Costs for casual or itinerant research assistance (budgeted under Line G6), such as the hiring of local field assistants at a research site, if essential to the execution of the study. Specifically address the significance of this local support to the successful execution of the project in the budget justification.
• Costs for other research services that are essential for the research and are not otherwise available.
• Costs for travel-specific insurance (such as for medical evacuation and repatriation of remains), if appropriately justified.
• Costs for modest (i.e., typically less than State Department or GAO per diem rates) living expenses for the co-PI during research in locations away from the university or normal place of residence.
• For field data collection efforts that are being carried out locally (i.e., within 50 miles of the researcher's home institution), costs for a per diem or stipend to support living costs if the research is being conducted full time. Those costs should be budgeted under Line G6.
• Costs of obtaining a visa required for the research.
• Costs related to achieving the broader impacts of the proposed work.
• Costs for the travel expenses of relatives or dependents, including childcare, may be allowable as specifically authorized and described in 2 CFR § 200.475. We recommend contacting program officers in advance of proposal submission, wherever possible, to discuss allowability of specific costs.

Costs that cannot be reimbursed by DDRIG awards include the following:

• Salary for the doctoral student or advisor.
• Costs for tuition, university fees, the purchase of textbooks or journals (except publication costs), dissertation preparation, routine medical insurance, mortgage payments, personal clothing, toiletries, over-the-counter medicines or other items not directly related to the conduct of dissertation research.
• Costs for transcription services are not ordinarily allowed.
• Costs for consultants budgeted under Line G3.
• Subawards budgeted under Line G5Costs for expensive cameras and computers unless justified in terms of the research goals.
• Insurance for equipment.
• "Gifts" or "tokens" for research participants/informants that are requested because it is a cultural norm to exchange gifts.

D. Research.gov/Grants.gov Requirements

For Proposals Submitted Via Research.gov:

To prepare and submit a proposal via Research.gov, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.research.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html . For Research.gov user support, call the Research.gov Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected] . The Research.gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the Research.gov system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:

Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: https://www.grants.gov/applicants . In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: [email protected] . The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation. Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to Research.gov for further processing. The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov informational page provides submission guidance to applicants and links to helpful resources including the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide , Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov how-to guide , and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Frequently Asked Questions . Grants.gov proposals must pass all NSF pre-check and post-check validations in order to be accepted by Research.gov at NSF. When submitting via Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends applicants initiate proposal submission at least five business days in advance of a deadline to allow adequate time to address NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting organization's local time on the deadline. Please note that some errors cannot be corrected in Grants.gov. Once a proposal passes pre-checks but fails any post-check, an applicant can only correct and submit the in-progress proposal in Research.gov.

Proposers that submitted via Research.gov may use Research.gov to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.

VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures

Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgment and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ .

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Leading the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Talent Development and the Delivery of Benefits from Research - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 - 2026 . These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.

1. Merit Review Principles

These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

• All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
• NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.
• Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project.

With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.

These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

2. Merit Review Criteria

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal.

When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

• Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and
• Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

• Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
• Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
• To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
• Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
• How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?
• Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and other underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management and Sharing Plan and the Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

B. Review and Selection Process

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Panel Review.

Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new recipients may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

VII. Award Administration Information

A. notification of the award.

Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)

B. Award Conditions

An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF . Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

Administrative and National Policy Requirements

Build America, Buy America

As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America's Workers (86 FR 7475), it is the policy of the executive branch to use terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards to maximize, consistent with law, the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.

Consistent with the requirements of the Build America, Buy America Act (Pub. L. 117-58, Division G, Title IX, Subtitle A, November 15, 2021), no funding made available through this funding opportunity may be obligated for infrastructure projects under an award unless all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States. For additional information, visit NSF's Build America, Buy America web page.

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final annual project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.

Failure to provide the required annual or final annual project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final annual project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

VIII. Agency Contacts

Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:

• NSF Help Desk: 1-800-381-1532
• Research.gov Help Desk e-mail: [email protected]

For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

• Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: [email protected] .

IX. Other Information

The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences . Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website .

Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at https://www.grants.gov .

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.F.7 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at . 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314 (NSF Information Center) (703) 292-5111 (703) 292-5090   Send an e-mail to: or telephone: (703) 292-8134 (703) 292-5111 Privacy Act And Public Burden Statements The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by proposers will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding proposers or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See System of Record Notices , NSF-50 , "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," and NSF-51 , "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records." Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne H. Plimpton Reports Clearance Officer Policy Office, Division of Institution and Award Support Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management National Science Foundation Alexandria, VA 22314 Graduate students can now register for annual Three Minute Thesis Competition Registration open for all degree-seeking graduate students at penn state's campuses, and also potential community judges, through oct. 25. Graduate students looking to highlight their scholarly achievements, compete for monetary awards and recognition, and hone their research communication skills are now able to register for the second annual University-wide Three Minute Thesis competition. The deadline for competitor and community judge registration is Oct. 25, 2024.   Credit: Penn State . Creative Commons September 16, 2024 UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Graduate students looking to highlight their scholarly achievements, compete for monetary awards and recognition, and hone their research communication skills are now able to register for second annual Penn State Three Minute Thesis competition , hosted by the J. Jeffrey and Ann Marie Fox Graduate School  Registration to compete is open through Friday, Oct. 25, to all degree-seeking graduate students at any Penn State campus.   Penn State community members, including graduate students, post-doctoral scholars, faculty and staff, are also invited to register as a judge by the Oct. 25 deadline for the event's first round.    The Three Minute Thesis (3MT) is an academic research communication competition developed by the University of Queensland (UQ), Australia. Each competitor has three minutes to speak and can use only one presentation slide to effectively explain their research to a general audience.   The competition will take place over two rounds. Judging for the opening round, which is a video format, will take place Nov. 4-8. The Fox Graduate School will be hosting the final round in partnership with the Graduate and Professional Student Association (GPSA) and the Fox Graduate School Alumni Society on Saturday, March 29, 2025, livestreamed from the Nittany Lion Inn on the University Park campus. A small group of invited judges will evaluate the final round presentations and award first and second place. One competitor will also receive a People’s Choice award, sponsored by the GPSA, which will be decided based on in-person and online audience voting.  The Fox Graduate School will also be hosting an upcoming two-part online workshop series in collaboration with two faculty members, Marcy Milhomme , associate teaching professor for continuing education in communication arts and sciences, and Andy Gustafson , associate clinical professor of accounting, that is designed to prepare students for the 3MT competition and set graduate students up for success with future presentations. Sessions will take place Sept. 25 and Oct. 2 , followed by Oct. 8 and 15 .  Liam Jackson [email protected] Cell Phone: 814-863-4356 Career Development Visitors and Neighbors Faculty and Staff Fox Graduate School Get the news by email Alzheimer's disease & dementia Arthritis & Rheumatism Attention deficit disorders Autism spectrum disorders Biomedical technology Diseases, Conditions, Syndromes Endocrinology & Metabolism Gastroenterology Gerontology & Geriatrics Health informatics Inflammatory disorders Medical economics Medical research Medications Neuroscience Obstetrics & gynaecology Oncology & Cancer Ophthalmology Overweight & Obesity Parkinson's & Movement disorders Psychology & Psychiatry Radiology & Imaging Sleep disorders Sports medicine & Kinesiology Vaccination Breast cancer Cardiovascular disease Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Colon cancer Coronary artery disease Heart attack Heart disease High blood pressure Kidney disease Lung cancer Multiple sclerosis Myocardial infarction Ovarian cancer Post traumatic stress disorder Rheumatoid arthritis Schizophrenia Skin cancer Type 2 diabetes Full List » share this! September 17, 2024 This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: fact-checked trusted source Research reveals that intensive treatment for diabetes can reduces gum disease inflammation by Osaka University While the link between diabetes and periodontal disease is known, the impact of diabetes treatment on periodontal health is less well understood. Research published in Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism demonstrates that periodontal inflammation can be positively affected just by receiving intensive diabetes treatment. It is widely believed that there is an interrelationship between diabetes and periodontal disease . While it has been shown that treatment of periodontal disease improves blood glucose control, the effect of diabetes treatment on periodontal disease has remained largely unknown. A collaborative research team involving the Graduate Schools of Dentistry, Medicine, and Engineering at Osaka University administered a two-week intensive diabetes treatment to 29 type 2 diabetes patients, analyzing systemic and dental indicators before and after treatment. No dental interventions were performed as part of this study; patients only received diabetes treatment. Results showed improvements in both glycoalbumin, a marker of blood sugar control, and PISA (periodontal inflamed surface area), indicating reduced blood glucose levels and periodontal inflammation. Further, comparison of subjects based on PISA improvement revealed that those with significant improvement had higher pre-treatment C-peptide levels, suggesting better insulin secretion and better CVRR and ABI values, indicating less severe diabetic neuropathy and peripheral vascular disorders. "These research findings are expected to advance our understanding of the mechanisms underlying the relationship between diabetes and periodontal disease," says senior author Masae Kuboniwa. "This study demonstrates that improving periodontal disease in diabetic patients requires not only periodontal treatment but also early diabetes management. We anticipate that promoting collaboration between medical and dental care from the early stages of diabetes can significantly contribute to preventing the onset and progression of periodontal disease in diabetic patients." Explore further Feedback to editors Study reveals sex-specific gene expression in adipose stem cells of mice 16 minutes ago New study increases understanding of HIV drug's negative effects on the brain 29 minutes ago Evidence of inverse relationship between incidence of Alzheimer's disease and colorectal cancer 32 minutes ago Study shows the brain divides a meal into different phases Gene variant protects newborns against jaundice, study finds Removing gene from fat tissue tricks body into burning more calories, study suggests Study sheds light on how virus-fighting cells develop during long COVID COVID-19 rates oscillate every six months in the US, new study shows Childhood trauma linked to major biological and health risks: Impacts differ depending on sex Critical immune factor for host defense against MRSA offers potential explanation for unsuccessful vaccine strategies Related stories. Protecting teeth with fruit: Antimicrobial effects found in biomass compounds Aug 28, 2024 Treating oral disease could yield T2DM-related cost savings Jan 4, 2020 A study proves oral health improves diabetes Feb 1, 2018 Tracking periodontal disease to improve diagnosis and treatment Aug 1, 2023 Common diabetes drug could treat gum disease and help with healthy aging, study claims Oct 10, 2023 Is good dental care key to stroke prevention? Feb 11, 2022 Recommended for you Study reveals how COVID-19 infection can cause or worsen diabetes 21 hours ago Social determinants of health associated with diabetic eye-care quality Sep 16, 2024 Study finds replacing ultra-processed foods in diet reduces type 2 diabetes risk Automated insulin delivery technology helps marathon runners with type 1 diabetes Sep 12, 2024 Novel class of once-weekly insulin as effective as daily injections for patients with type 2 diabetes, new study finds Sep 10, 2024 Low-carb/high-fat diets for weight loss may actually boost risk of type 2 diabetes Sep 5, 2024 Let us know if there is a problem with our content Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ). Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors. Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages. E-mail the story Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Medical Xpress in any form. Newsletter sign up Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties. More information Privacy policy Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account. E-mail newsletter Student Insights on Wolf Coexistence: Four FNP Theses from Local to National Perspectives Currently, seven of the nine wolf packs in the Netherlands are located in the Veluwe region of Gelderland. Considering the current strictly protected status of wolves in the Netherlands, it is likely that the population will increase further in the coming years. This will increase the likelihood of conflicts between wolves and humans, and therefore has sparked a debate on which measures should be taken for coexistence with the wolf. Four students separately examined the perception of people on human-wolf coexistence and related policy making as part of their thesis work at FNP. In this blog the students present their findings about perception of local inhabitants and sheep keepers on the presence of the wolf, how the issue is framed in national media and how different lobby groups try to influence policy making on wolves. Bart Hendriks - Perceptions of local inhabitants During my Master’s thesis, I researched how the presence of the wolf affects the behavior and lives of residents of the Veluwe. These were ordinary citizens and not residents directly financially affected by the wolf. For this purpose, I conducted long in-depth interviews with 15 residents of the Veluwe and analyzed the interviews with various social theories. The interviewees showed four types of behavioral changes, the majority of them being predominantly negative. These include more avoidance behavior (i.e., people avoiding certain parts of nature areas, or nature areas altogether), people taking defensive and safety measures (for example walking in groups or even bringing knives with them to defend against the wolf) and also residents becoming more alert to signals and the presence of the wolf. Most of these behavioral changes are influenced by residents seeing the wolf as a potential danger to themselves and their children or kept animals. Experiences with the wolf, beliefs and social factors play an important role as well. Two of fifteen participants were positive about the wolf and indicated that for them the wolf was an enrichment of Dutch nature. While participants often indicated that they feel restricted in their freedom and no longer feel safe in their environment, most of them shared as well that they admire wolves and recognize the Veluwe as the most suited area for wolves in the Netherlands. In order to live well together with the wolf, the interviewees indicated that they would like to have a sense of control. Current communication about the wolf is not adequate enough and leans too much on sharing plain scientific knowledge and facts, without addressing the emotions and worries that local inhabitants have. They experience situations differently than what science tells them, and are therefore better served by training or ways in which they maintain a sense of control. Julia Noorlander - Perceptions of sheep keepers The Latin phrase "auribus teneo lupum," meaning "holding a wolf by its ears," aptly describes the predicament of sheep keepers on the Veluwe. They face significant challenges, whether they implement protective measures against wolves or not. The fifteen sheep keepers I interviewed for my Master’s thesis acknowledged that wolves belong in natural areas with abundant prey, such as deer and boar, and that protective measures can in theory reduce wolf attacks on sheep. However, the implementation of these measures is fraught with difficulties and actual or perceived negative outcomes: electric fences require constant monitoring and maintenance, which is labor-intensive, and participants worried about potentially disruptive effects on the migration of other wildlife like deer, foxes, and badgers. Guard dogs require daily care and can get into conflict with rural inhabitants and visitors. Keeping sheep indoors is not only expensive (due to extra fodder, straw, and labor), it can harm their welfare and reduce their vital role in managing grassland, cultural landscapes, dikes and heather ecosystems. My results include more examples of challenges. Contrary to misconceptions, the sheep keepers I interviewed on the Veluwe are not opposed to protective measures. They feel a deep responsibility for their sheep and are driven by a passion for animal care rather than profit. However, the difficulty of implementing these measures and the expected increase of wolf populations in rural areas on the Veluwe, make their situation particularly challenging. To ensure the co-existence of sheep keeping and nature conservation on the Veluwe, several steps should be taken. My results call for innovative solutions and collaborative efforts. By providing financial support, developing practical protection measures, and fostering cooperation, we can create a sustainable environment where both livestock and wildlife thrive. Innovation of livestock protection measures and a more equitable division of costs by increasing support to animal keepers in their efforts to protect their animals could be beneficial. The intention to use livestock protection measures might increase if they were more practical and feasible in implementation, remained effective in reducing attacks on the long term, and minimized negative side-effects on animal welfare and other wildlife. Laura Koenderink - Wolf coexistence in Dutch media I focused my Bachelor’s thesis on the Dutch understanding of coexistence with the wolf, by conducting a media analysis. I have analyzed 48 news articles from Dutch newspapers Algemeen Dagblad, de Volkskrant and De Telegraaf. In each article I searched for words and phrases that would reveal the perception of coexistence with the wolf. Prior to starting, my expectations were that the Dutch media would be negative towards the wolf and thereby that the wolf debate would be more polarized. However, in the media sources that were included in this study, the wolf issue in the Netherlands delivered a more nuanced debate than one might think. The analyzed articles had an accepting attitude towards the comeback of the wolf. Rather than being against the wolf altogether, the articles focused on making living with the wolf possible with little conflict. In various articles, different measures were mentioned on how to make this possible. My research concluded that, in the newspapers I examined, coexistence with the wolf is understood as humans living spatially separate from the wolf in the Netherlands. However, the Netherlands is a very densely populated country and thus completely separating humans from wolves might not be possible. Therefore, more research would be needed to make any conclusions about the possibility of humans living spatially separate from wolves in the Netherlands. Yustin Kaptein - Lobbying dynamics in wolf policymaking Following the insights on local perceptions and media coverage provided by Bart and Laura, my Master’s thesis focused on the lobbying dynamics that influence wolf policymaking in the Netherlands, particularly surrounding the recent call for a revaluation of the wolf’s protected species status by the European Commission. At first, I identified two key advocacy coalitions in relation to these developments in wolf governance: those advocating for conservation and those seeking reduction of wolf numbers. Each coalition was found to be driven by its own distinct set of core values and beliefs (e.g. conservation advocates prioritizing ecological preservation), informing different lobbying strategies to influence wolf policymaking processes. However, I also identified a third, rather neutral, coalition of stakeholders promoting effective management. This coalition seemed to prioritize the efficacy of wolf management rather than taking resolute ideological stances toward the wolf in the Netherlands. The more my study progressed, the more it became apparent that the majority of interviewed stakeholders actually belonged to this particular coalition of effective management advocates, which is something I did not expect initially. Nonetheless, resource disparities between coalitions, for instance in financial means and manpower, impact their effectiveness and create power imbalances. Despite these differences, there appears to be a willingness among stakeholders to engage in dialogue and learn from each other. Ultimately, this highlights the need for collaborative policymaking to balance local concerns with national strategies, ensuring sustainable wolf governance in the Netherlands and beyond. While wolves are a controversial topic, the results of these four theses show that for many directly involved people the issue is not about whether to have wolves in the Netherlands or not, but rather about finding pragmatic and acceptable solutions for coexistence. This was reflected in Dutch newspapers and in the interviews with those who manage wolf-human interactions and those who directly coexist with wolves (e.g. locals and livestock owners). Often, spatial separation of wolves and humans is preferred as a solution (e.g. confining them to protected areas or remote wilderness zones), but this is not feasible within the intensely managed landscape of the Netherlands and Europe. While it will remain a challenge to find solutions that are feasible and sufficient for the different stakeholders, the results suggest that there is interest and openness for finding compromises. One important recommendation is that the experiences and emotions of those coexisting with wolves, whether positive or negative, are highly relevant and should be considered in management plans. In general, the results align with research on human-wolf coexistence in other European settings, such as the work from Sweden by Sabrina Dressel, who supervised these four students. Sabrina: “We see that the longer people coexist with newly returned wolf populations, and as these populations grow and their impacts increase, the more demands are placed on practical management actions to mitigate some of the direct conflicts.” Are you interested in the exciting thesis opportunities we offer at FNP? Feel free to reach out to us! If you have any questions about wolf coexistence, please reach out to Sabrina Dressel by using the contact form above 134 IMAGES Research Questions How to Write a Good Research Question (w/ Examples) Research Questions How to Write a Research Question in 2024: Types, Steps, and Examples Dissertation Questionnaire PPT VIDEO How to Write a Management Dissertation? : A Step-by-Step Guide Undergraduate Dissertations, Top 5 Questions Answered Dissertation Topic Designing good quality research questions Using Dissertations to Produce Research Questions Reviewing MIT Professors' Dissertations: Unveiling AI-Enabled Research COMMENTS 10 Research Question Examples to Guide your Research Project The first question asks for a ready-made solution, and is not focused or researchable. The second question is a clearer comparative question, but note that it may not be practically feasible. For a smaller research project or thesis, it could be narrowed down further to focus on the effectiveness of drunk driving laws in just one or two countries. Developing the Research Question for a Thesis, Dissertation, or Research questions must be aligned with other aspects of the thesis, dissertation, or project study proposal, such as the problem statement, research design, and analysis strategy. To summarize: Idea >Reviewing literature > Identifying the gap in theory or practice >Problem and Purpose Statements >Research question Writing Strong Research Questions A good research question is essential to guide your research paper, dissertation, or thesis. All research questions should be: Focused on a single problem or issue. Researchable using primary and/or secondary sources. Feasible to answer within the timeframe and practical constraints. Specific enough to answer thoroughly. Research Questions, Objectives & Aims (+ Examples) The research aims, objectives and research questions (collectively called the "golden thread") are arguably the most important thing you need to get right when you're crafting a research proposal, dissertation or thesis.We receive questions almost every day about this "holy trinity" of research and there's certainly a lot of confusion out there, so we've crafted this post to help ... Research Question Examples & Ideas: The ULTIMATE List Research Question Examples 🧑🏻‍🏫. 25+ Practical Examples & Ideas To Help You Get Started. By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | October 2023. A well-crafted research question (or set of questions) sets the stage for a robust study and meaningful insights. But, if you're new to research, it's not always clear what exactly constitutes a good ... How to Write a Good Research Question (w/ Examples) It can be difficult to come up with a good research question, but there are a few steps you can follow to make it a bit easier. 1. Start with an interesting and relevant topic. Choose a research topic that is interesting but also relevant and aligned with your own country's culture or your university's capabilities. Dissertations & projects: Research questions First, it may be useful to explain the difference between a research question and a hypothesis. A research question is simply a question that your research will address and hopefully answer (or give an explanation of why you couldn't answer it). A hypothesis is a statement that suggests how you expect something to function or behave (and which ... Research Question Overview of developing research questions. Effective writing should have a clear purpose, and purpose shines through the best when an essay or dissertation responds to an explicit research question(s). Sometimes, you will need to define or refine a research question based on an essay title provided by an instructor. In the case of dissertations ... How to Write Research Questions for Your Dissertation Here's how to develop a strong research question that is clear, focused, and relevant to your field of study. 1. Choose a Research Question Relevant to Your Field. Commence by selecting a research question that aligns with the interests and priorities of your academic field. Consider current debates, gaps in the existing literature, and ... How to Develop a STRONG Research Question A good research question is essential to guide your research paper, project, or thesis. It pinpoints exactly what you want to find out and gives your work a ... How to Write a Research Question in 2024: Types, Steps, and Examples A research question is a question that a study or research project, through its thesis statement, aims to answer. This question often addresses an issue or a problem, which, through analysis and interpretation of data, is answered in the study's conclusion. ... Types of Research Questions: Research questions can be categorized into ... How to Write a Research Question Most professional researchers focus on topics they are genuinely interested in studying. Writers should choose a broad topic about which they genuinely would like to know more. An example of a general topic might be "Slavery in the American South" or "Films of the 1930s.". Do some preliminary research on your general topic. Developing a Good Research Question For example, a research question for a history dissertation might be, "How was a counter-culture identity sustained in Humboldt County, California, in the 1980s and 1990s?" The discipline of English is another one where research questions may include mention of data. Scholars in English are often interested in a writer or group of writers or a ... Crafting Your Thesis Statement: Formulating a Strong Research Question Step 1: Choose a Topic. The first step in crafting a strong thesis statement is choosing a topic that interests you and is relevant to your field of study. A good topic should be specific enough to allow for in-depth research and analysis but broad enough to provide adequate material for discussion. How To Choose A Research Topic For A Dissertation Step 5: Narrow down, then evaluate. By this stage, you should have a healthy list of research topics. Step away from the ideation and thinking for a few days, clear your mind. The key is to get some distance from your ideas, so that you can sit down with your list and review it with a more objective view. PDF Developing Your Research Questions Central Question Guidelines. 1. Begin with "How" or "What". Avoid "Why". 2. List the central phenomenon you plan to explore. 3. Identify the participants and research site [this is a quantitative term that implies cause and effect] Qualitative Central Question Script: Research Question Examples Research Questions for Dissertation Examples Below are 10 examples of research questions that will enable you to develop research questions for your research. These examples will help you to check whether your chosen research questions can be addressed or whether they are too broad to find a conclusive answer. How to structure quantitative research questions Structure of descriptive research questions. There are six steps required to construct a descriptive research question: (1) choose your starting phrase; (2) identify and name the dependent variable; (3) identify the group (s) you are interested in; (4) decide whether dependent variable or group (s) should be included first, last or in two parts ... How to Choose a Dissertation Topic Step 3: Look for books and articles. Step 4: Find a niche. Step 5: Consider the type of research. Step 6: Determine the relevance. Step 7: Make sure it's plausible. Step 8: Get your topic approved. Other interesting articles. Frequently asked questions about dissertation topics. Research Questions and Hypotheses Research Questions and Hypotheses. All dissertations answer at least one research question (and/or hypothesis). A poorly constructed research question (and/or hypothesis) will not only be much more challenging to answer, but will also make it difficult for the person marking your dissertation to understand what you are trying to achieve. Qualitative Research Questions From the Dissertation Center, Chapter 1: Research Question Overview, there are several considerations when forming a qualitative research question. Qualitative research questions should . Below is an example of a qualitative phenomenological design. Note the use of the term "lived experience" in the central research question. This aligns ... Research Question Generator: Tool for Academic Purposes Research Question Generator: How to Use. Using our research question generator tool, you won't need to crack your brains over this part of the writing assignment anymore. All you need to do is: Insert your study topic of interest in the relevant tab. Choose a subject and click "Generate topics". Grab one of the offered options on the list. Subject Guides for Your Research The Library has created discipline and topic focused library guides to assist you in your research. This includes relevant databases, critical books, and other resources which can be useful in investigating your research topic. Some primary library guides for researching in social work are: Fighting Racism and Hate: A Case Study of Black Graduate Students This qualitative, single case study examined Black graduate students' perceptions of a university president's responses to racialized incidents and how these perceptions inform Black graduate students' larger contextual understanding of campus racial climate. Guided by Hurtado et al.'s (2012) Multi-Contextual Model for Diverse Learning Environments, the research questions were: What ... Research Proposal and Thesis Format This is a written presentation of an intended research specifying the problem, the purpose, scope/objectives, methodology, references and the financial plan/budget. A synopsis is an outline of the research proposal of 3-5 pages length (including references) which is currently required for provisional admission to Ph.D and other doctoral degree studies at Makerere University. Dissertation Structure & Layout 101 (+ Examples) Abstract or executive summary. The dissertation abstract (or executive summary for some degrees) serves to provide the first-time reader (and marker or moderator) with a big-picture view of your research project. It should give them an understanding of the key insights and findings from the research, without them needing to read the rest of the report - in other words, it should be able to ... Cultural Anthropology Program Separately submitted collaborative proposals will be returned without review. The project title must begin with "Doctoral Dissertation Research:". The title should be descriptive rather than clever. It should emphasize the generalizable science that the research will address, such as the main research question that the student aims to investigate. Graduate students can now register for annual Three Minute Thesis UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Graduate students looking to highlight their scholarly achievements, compete for monetary awards and recognition, and hone their research communication skills are now able to register for second annual Penn State Three Minute Thesis competition, hosted by the J. Jeffrey and Ann Marie Fox Graduate School . Registration to compete is open through Friday, Oct. 25, to all ... Research reveals that intensive treatment for diabetes can reduces gum A collaborative research team involving the Graduate Schools of Dentistry, Medicine, and Engineering at Osaka University administered a two-week intensive diabetes treatment to 29 type 2 diabetes ... Student Insights on Wolf Coexistence: Four FNP Theses from Local to Currently, seven of the nine wolf packs in the Netherlands are located in the Veluwe region of Gelderland. Considering the current strictly protected status of wolves in the Netherlands, it is likely that the population will increase further in the coming years. This will increase the likelihood of conflicts between wolves and humans, and therefore has sparked a debate on which measures should ... assignment essay homework phd report review speech thesis