report on research findings

Generate accurate APA citations for free

• Knowledge Base
• APA Style 7th edition
• How to write an APA results section

Reporting Research Results in APA Style | Tips & Examples

Published on December 21, 2020 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on January 17, 2024.

The results section of a quantitative research paper is where you summarize your data and report the findings of any relevant statistical analyses.

The APA manual provides rigorous guidelines for what to report in quantitative research papers in the fields of psychology, education, and other social sciences.

Use these standards to answer your research questions and report your data analyses in a complete and transparent way.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What goes in your results section, introduce your data, summarize your data, report statistical results, presenting numbers effectively, what doesn’t belong in your results section, frequently asked questions about results in apa.

In APA style, the results section includes preliminary information about the participants and data, descriptive and inferential statistics, and the results of any exploratory analyses.

Include these in your results section:

• Participant flow and recruitment period. Report the number of participants at every stage of the study, as well as the dates when recruitment took place.
• Missing data . Identify the proportion of data that wasn’t included in your final analysis and state the reasons.
• Any adverse events. Make sure to report any unexpected events or side effects (for clinical studies).
• Descriptive statistics . Summarize the primary and secondary outcomes of the study.
• Inferential statistics , including confidence intervals and effect sizes. Address the primary and secondary research questions by reporting the detailed results of your main analyses.
• Results of subgroup or exploratory analyses, if applicable. Place detailed results in supplementary materials.

Write up the results in the past tense because you’re describing the outcomes of a completed research study.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Before diving into your research findings, first describe the flow of participants at every stage of your study and whether any data were excluded from the final analysis.

Participant flow and recruitment period

It’s necessary to report any attrition, which is the decline in participants at every sequential stage of a study. That’s because an uneven number of participants across groups sometimes threatens internal validity and makes it difficult to compare groups. Be sure to also state all reasons for attrition.

If your study has multiple stages (e.g., pre-test, intervention, and post-test) and groups (e.g., experimental and control groups), a flow chart is the best way to report the number of participants in each group per stage and reasons for attrition.

Also report the dates for when you recruited participants or performed follow-up sessions.

Missing data

Another key issue is the completeness of your dataset. It’s necessary to report both the amount and reasons for data that was missing or excluded.

Data can become unusable due to equipment malfunctions, improper storage, unexpected events, participant ineligibility, and so on. For each case, state the reason why the data were unusable.

Some data points may be removed from the final analysis because they are outliers—but you must be able to justify how you decided what to exclude.

If you applied any techniques for overcoming or compensating for lost data, report those as well.

Adverse events

For clinical studies, report all events with serious consequences or any side effects that occured.

Descriptive statistics summarize your data for the reader. Present descriptive statistics for each primary, secondary, and subgroup analysis.

Don’t provide formulas or citations for commonly used statistics (e.g., standard deviation) – but do provide them for new or rare equations.

Descriptive statistics

The exact descriptive statistics that you report depends on the types of data in your study. Categorical variables can be reported using proportions, while quantitative data can be reported using means and standard deviations . For a large set of numbers, a table is the most effective presentation format.

Include sample sizes (overall and for each group) as well as appropriate measures of central tendency and variability for the outcomes in your results section. For every point estimate , add a clearly labelled measure of variability as well.

Be sure to note how you combined data to come up with variables of interest. For every variable of interest, explain how you operationalized it.

According to APA journal standards, it’s necessary to report all relevant hypothesis tests performed, estimates of effect sizes, and confidence intervals.

When reporting statistical results, you should first address primary research questions before moving onto secondary research questions and any exploratory or subgroup analyses.

Present the results of tests in the order that you performed them—report the outcomes of main tests before post-hoc tests, for example. Don’t leave out any relevant results, even if they don’t support your hypothesis.

Inferential statistics

For each statistical test performed, first restate the hypothesis , then state whether your hypothesis was supported and provide the outcomes that led you to that conclusion.

Report the following for each hypothesis test:

• the test statistic value,
• the degrees of freedom ,
• the exact p- value (unless it is less than 0.001),
• the magnitude and direction of the effect.

When reporting complex data analyses, such as factor analysis or multivariate analysis, present the models estimated in detail, and state the statistical software used. Make sure to report any violations of statistical assumptions or problems with estimation.

Effect sizes and confidence intervals

For each hypothesis test performed, you should present confidence intervals and estimates of effect sizes .

Confidence intervals are useful for showing the variability around point estimates. They should be included whenever you report population parameter estimates.

Effect sizes indicate how impactful the outcomes of a study are. But since they are estimates, it’s recommended that you also provide confidence intervals of effect sizes.

Subgroup or exploratory analyses

Briefly report the results of any other planned or exploratory analyses you performed. These may include subgroup analyses as well.

Subgroup analyses come with a high chance of false positive results, because performing a large number of comparison or correlation tests increases the chances of finding significant results.

If you find significant results in these analyses, make sure to appropriately report them as exploratory (rather than confirmatory) results to avoid overstating their importance.

While these analyses can be reported in less detail in the main text, you can provide the full analyses in supplementary materials.

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

To effectively present numbers, use a mix of text, tables , and figures where appropriate:

• To present three or fewer numbers, try a sentence ,
• To present between 4 and 20 numbers, try a table ,
• To present more than 20 numbers, try a figure .

Since these are general guidelines, use your own judgment and feedback from others for effective presentation of numbers.

Tables and figures should be numbered and have titles, along with relevant notes. Make sure to present data only once throughout the paper and refer to any tables and figures in the text.

Formatting statistics and numbers

It’s important to follow capitalization , italicization, and abbreviation rules when referring to statistics in your paper. There are specific format guidelines for reporting statistics in APA , as well as general rules about writing numbers .

If you are unsure of how to present specific symbols, look up the detailed APA guidelines or other papers in your field.

It’s important to provide a complete picture of your data analyses and outcomes in a concise way. For that reason, raw data and any interpretations of your results are not included in the results section.

It’s rarely appropriate to include raw data in your results section. Instead, you should always save the raw data securely and make them available and accessible to any other researchers who request them.

Making scientific research available to others is a key part of academic integrity and open science.

Interpretation or discussion of results

This belongs in your discussion section. Your results section is where you objectively report all relevant findings and leave them open for interpretation by readers.

While you should state whether the findings of statistical tests lend support to your hypotheses, refrain from forming conclusions to your research questions in the results section.

Explanation of how statistics tests work

For the sake of concise writing, you can safely assume that readers of your paper have professional knowledge of how statistical inferences work.

In an APA results section , you should generally report the following:

• Participant flow and recruitment period.
• Missing data and any adverse events.
• Descriptive statistics about your samples.
• Inferential statistics , including confidence intervals and effect sizes.
• Results of any subgroup or exploratory analyses, if applicable.

According to the APA guidelines, you should report enough detail on inferential statistics so that your readers understand your analyses.

• the test statistic value
• the degrees of freedom
• the exact p value (unless it is less than 0.001)
• the magnitude and direction of the effect

You should also present confidence intervals and estimates of effect sizes where relevant.

In APA style, statistics can be presented in the main text or as tables or figures . To decide how to present numbers, you can follow APA guidelines:

• To present three or fewer numbers, try a sentence,
• To present between 4 and 20 numbers, try a table,
• To present more than 20 numbers, try a figure.

Results are usually written in the past tense , because they are describing the outcome of completed actions.

The results chapter or section simply and objectively reports what you found, without speculating on why you found these results. The discussion interprets the meaning of the results, puts them in context, and explains why they matter.

In qualitative research , results and discussion are sometimes combined. But in quantitative research , it’s considered important to separate the objective results from your interpretation of them.

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.

Bhandari, P. (2024, January 17). Reporting Research Results in APA Style | Tips & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 17, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/results-section/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, how to write an apa methods section, how to format tables and figures in apa style, reporting statistics in apa style | guidelines & examples, scribbr apa citation checker.

An innovative new tool that checks your APA citations with AI software. Say goodbye to inaccurate citations!

• 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 the Results/Findings Section in Research

What is the research paper Results section and what does it do?

The Results section of a scientific research paper represents the core findings of a study derived from the methods applied to gather and analyze information. It presents these findings in a logical sequence without bias or interpretation from the author, setting up the reader for later interpretation and evaluation in the Discussion section. A major purpose of the Results section is to break down the data into sentences that show its significance to the research question(s).

The Results section appears third in the section sequence in most scientific papers. It follows the presentation of the Methods and Materials and is presented before the Discussion section —although the Results and Discussion are presented together in many journals. This section answers the basic question “What did you find in your research?”

What is included in the Results section?

The Results section should include the findings of your study and ONLY the findings of your study. The findings include:

• Data presented in tables, charts, graphs, and other figures (may be placed into the text or on separate pages at the end of the manuscript)
• A contextual analysis of this data explaining its meaning in sentence form
• All data that corresponds to the central research question(s)
• All secondary findings (secondary outcomes, subgroup analyses, etc.)

If the scope of the study is broad, or if you studied a variety of variables, or if the methodology used yields a wide range of different results, the author should present only those results that are most relevant to the research question stated in the Introduction section .

As a general rule, any information that does not present the direct findings or outcome of the study should be left out of this section. Unless the journal requests that authors combine the Results and Discussion sections, explanations and interpretations should be omitted from the Results.

How are the results organized?

The best way to organize your Results section is “logically.” One logical and clear method of organizing research results is to provide them alongside the research questions—within each research question, present the type of data that addresses that research question.

Let’s look at an example. Your research question is based on a survey among patients who were treated at a hospital and received postoperative care. Let’s say your first research question is:

“What do hospital patients over age 55 think about postoperative care?”

This can actually be represented as a heading within your Results section, though it might be presented as a statement rather than a question:

Attitudes towards postoperative care in patients over the age of 55

Now present the results that address this specific research question first. In this case, perhaps a table illustrating data from a survey. Likert items can be included in this example. Tables can also present standard deviations, probabilities, correlation matrices, etc.

Following this, present a content analysis, in words, of one end of the spectrum of the survey or data table. In our example case, start with the POSITIVE survey responses regarding postoperative care, using descriptive phrases. For example:

“Sixty-five percent of patients over 55 responded positively to the question “ Are you satisfied with your hospital’s postoperative care ?” (Fig. 2)

Include other results such as subcategory analyses. The amount of textual description used will depend on how much interpretation of tables and figures is necessary and how many examples the reader needs in order to understand the significance of your research findings.

Next, present a content analysis of another part of the spectrum of the same research question, perhaps the NEGATIVE or NEUTRAL responses to the survey. For instance:

  “As Figure 1 shows, 15 out of 60 patients in Group A responded negatively to Question 2.”

After you have assessed the data in one figure and explained it sufficiently, move on to your next research question. For example:

  “How does patient satisfaction correspond to in-hospital improvements made to postoperative care?”

This kind of data may be presented through a figure or set of figures (for instance, a paired T-test table).

Explain the data you present, here in a table, with a concise content analysis:

“The p-value for the comparison between the before and after groups of patients was .03% (Fig. 2), indicating that the greater the dissatisfaction among patients, the more frequent the improvements that were made to postoperative care.”

Let’s examine another example of a Results section from a study on plant tolerance to heavy metal stress . In the Introduction section, the aims of the study are presented as “determining the physiological and morphological responses of Allium cepa L. towards increased cadmium toxicity” and “evaluating its potential to accumulate the metal and its associated environmental consequences.” The Results section presents data showing how these aims are achieved in tables alongside a content analysis, beginning with an overview of the findings:

“Cadmium caused inhibition of root and leave elongation, with increasing effects at higher exposure doses (Fig. 1a-c).”

The figure containing this data is cited in parentheses. Note that this author has combined three graphs into one single figure. Separating the data into separate graphs focusing on specific aspects makes it easier for the reader to assess the findings, and consolidating this information into one figure saves space and makes it easy to locate the most relevant results.

Following this overall summary, the relevant data in the tables is broken down into greater detail in text form in the Results section.

• “Results on the bio-accumulation of cadmium were found to be the highest (17.5 mg kgG1) in the bulb, when the concentration of cadmium in the solution was 1×10G2 M and lowest (0.11 mg kgG1) in the leaves when the concentration was 1×10G3 M.”

Captioning and Referencing Tables and Figures

Tables and figures are central components of your Results section and you need to carefully think about the most effective way to use graphs and tables to present your findings . Therefore, it is crucial to know how to write strong figure captions and to refer to them within the text of the Results section.

The most important advice one can give here as well as throughout the paper is to check the requirements and standards of the journal to which you are submitting your work. Every journal has its own design and layout standards, which you can find in the author instructions on the target journal’s website. Perusing a journal’s published articles will also give you an idea of the proper number, size, and complexity of your figures.

Regardless of which format you use, the figures should be placed in the order they are referenced in the Results section and be as clear and easy to understand as possible. If there are multiple variables being considered (within one or more research questions), it can be a good idea to split these up into separate figures. Subsequently, these can be referenced and analyzed under separate headings and paragraphs in the text.

To create a caption, consider the research question being asked and change it into a phrase. For instance, if one question is “Which color did participants choose?”, the caption might be “Color choice by participant group.” Or in our last research paper example, where the question was “What is the concentration of cadmium in different parts of the onion after 14 days?” the caption reads:

 “Fig. 1(a-c): Mean concentration of Cd determined in (a) bulbs, (b) leaves, and (c) roots of onions after a 14-day period.”

Steps for Composing the Results Section

Because each study is unique, there is no one-size-fits-all approach when it comes to designing a strategy for structuring and writing the section of a research paper where findings are presented. The content and layout of this section will be determined by the specific area of research, the design of the study and its particular methodologies, and the guidelines of the target journal and its editors. However, the following steps can be used to compose the results of most scientific research studies and are essential for researchers who are new to preparing a manuscript for publication or who need a reminder of how to construct the Results section.

Step 1 : Consult the guidelines or instructions that the target journal or publisher provides authors and read research papers it has published, especially those with similar topics, methods, or results to your study.

• The guidelines will generally outline specific requirements for the results or findings section, and the published articles will provide sound examples of successful approaches.
• Note length limitations on restrictions on content. For instance, while many journals require the Results and Discussion sections to be separate, others do not—qualitative research papers often include results and interpretations in the same section (“Results and Discussion”).
• Reading the aims and scope in the journal’s “ guide for authors ” section and understanding the interests of its readers will be invaluable in preparing to write the Results section.

Step 2 : Consider your research results in relation to the journal’s requirements and catalogue your results.

• Focus on experimental results and other findings that are especially relevant to your research questions and objectives and include them even if they are unexpected or do not support your ideas and hypotheses.
• Catalogue your findings—use subheadings to streamline and clarify your report. This will help you avoid excessive and peripheral details as you write and also help your reader understand and remember your findings. Create appendices that might interest specialists but prove too long or distracting for other readers.
• Decide how you will structure of your results. You might match the order of the research questions and hypotheses to your results, or you could arrange them according to the order presented in the Methods section. A chronological order or even a hierarchy of importance or meaningful grouping of main themes or categories might prove effective. Consider your audience, evidence, and most importantly, the objectives of your research when choosing a structure for presenting your findings.

Step 3 : Design figures and tables to present and illustrate your data.

• Tables and figures should be numbered according to the order in which they are mentioned in the main text of the paper.
• Information in figures should be relatively self-explanatory (with the aid of captions), and their design should include all definitions and other information necessary for readers to understand the findings without reading all of the text.
• Use tables and figures as a focal point to tell a clear and informative story about your research and avoid repeating information. But remember that while figures clarify and enhance the text, they cannot replace it.

Step 4 : Draft your Results section using the findings and figures you have organized.

• The goal is to communicate this complex information as clearly and precisely as possible; precise and compact phrases and sentences are most effective.
• In the opening paragraph of this section, restate your research questions or aims to focus the reader’s attention to what the results are trying to show. It is also a good idea to summarize key findings at the end of this section to create a logical transition to the interpretation and discussion that follows.
• Try to write in the past tense and the active voice to relay the findings since the research has already been done and the agent is usually clear. This will ensure that your explanations are also clear and logical.
• Make sure that any specialized terminology or abbreviation you have used here has been defined and clarified in the  Introduction section .

Step 5 : Review your draft; edit and revise until it reports results exactly as you would like to have them reported to your readers.

• Double-check the accuracy and consistency of all the data, as well as all of the visual elements included.
• Read your draft aloud to catch language errors (grammar, spelling, and mechanics), awkward phrases, and missing transitions.
• Ensure that your results are presented in the best order to focus on objectives and prepare readers for interpretations, valuations, and recommendations in the Discussion section . Look back over the paper’s Introduction and background while anticipating the Discussion and Conclusion sections to ensure that the presentation of your results is consistent and effective.
• Consider seeking additional guidance on your paper. Find additional readers to look over your Results section and see if it can be improved in any way. Peers, professors, or qualified experts can provide valuable insights.

One excellent option is to use a professional English proofreading and editing service  such as Wordvice, including our paper editing service . With hundreds of qualified editors from dozens of scientific fields, Wordvice has helped thousands of authors revise their manuscripts and get accepted into their target journals. Read more about the  proofreading and editing process  before proceeding with getting academic editing services and manuscript editing services for your manuscript.

As the representation of your study’s data output, the Results section presents the core information in your research paper. By writing with clarity and conciseness and by highlighting and explaining the crucial findings of their study, authors increase the impact and effectiveness of their research manuscripts.

For more articles and videos on writing your research manuscript, visit Wordvice’s Resources page.

Wordvice Resources

• How to Write a Research Paper Introduction 
• Which Verb Tenses to Use in a Research Paper
• How to Write an Abstract for a Research Paper
• How to Write a Research Paper Title
• Useful Phrases for Academic Writing
• Common Transition Terms in Academic Papers
• Active and Passive Voice in Research Papers
• 100+ Verbs That Will Make Your Research Writing Amazing
• Tips for Paraphrasing in Research Papers

• Research Report: Definition, Types + [Writing Guide]

One of the reasons for carrying out research is to add to the existing body of knowledge. Therefore, when conducting research, you need to document your processes and findings in a research report. 

With a research report, it is easy to outline the findings of your systematic investigation and any gaps needing further inquiry. Knowing how to create a detailed research report will prove useful when you need to conduct research.  

What is a Research Report?

A research report is a well-crafted document that outlines the processes, data, and findings of a systematic investigation. It is an important document that serves as a first-hand account of the research process, and it is typically considered an objective and accurate source of information.

In many ways, a research report can be considered as a summary of the research process that clearly highlights findings, recommendations, and other important details. Reading a well-written research report should provide you with all the information you need about the core areas of the research process.

Features of a Research Report 

So how do you recognize a research report when you see one? Here are some of the basic features that define a research report. 

• It is a detailed presentation of research processes and findings, and it usually includes tables and graphs. 
• It is written in a formal language.
• A research report is usually written in the third person.
• It is informative and based on first-hand verifiable information.
• It is formally structured with headings, sections, and bullet points.
• It always includes recommendations for future actions. 

Types of Research Report 

The research report is classified based on two things; nature of research and target audience.

Nature of Research

• Qualitative Research Report

This is the type of report written for qualitative research . It outlines the methods, processes, and findings of a qualitative method of systematic investigation. In educational research, a qualitative research report provides an opportunity for one to apply his or her knowledge and develop skills in planning and executing qualitative research projects.

A qualitative research report is usually descriptive in nature. Hence, in addition to presenting details of the research process, you must also create a descriptive narrative of the information.

• Quantitative Research Report

A quantitative research report is a type of research report that is written for quantitative research. Quantitative research is a type of systematic investigation that pays attention to numerical or statistical values in a bid to find answers to research questions. 

In this type of research report, the researcher presents quantitative data to support the research process and findings. Unlike a qualitative research report that is mainly descriptive, a quantitative research report works with numbers; that is, it is numerical in nature. 

Target Audience

Also, a research report can be said to be technical or popular based on the target audience. If you’re dealing with a general audience, you would need to present a popular research report, and if you’re dealing with a specialized audience, you would submit a technical report. 

• Technical Research Report

A technical research report is a detailed document that you present after carrying out industry-based research. This report is highly specialized because it provides information for a technical audience; that is, individuals with above-average knowledge in the field of study. 

In a technical research report, the researcher is expected to provide specific information about the research process, including statistical analyses and sampling methods. Also, the use of language is highly specialized and filled with jargon. 

Examples of technical research reports include legal and medical research reports. 

• Popular Research Report

A popular research report is one for a general audience; that is, for individuals who do not necessarily have any knowledge in the field of study. A popular research report aims to make information accessible to everyone. 

It is written in very simple language, which makes it easy to understand the findings and recommendations. Examples of popular research reports are the information contained in newspapers and magazines. 

Importance of a Research Report 

• Knowledge Transfer: As already stated above, one of the reasons for carrying out research is to contribute to the existing body of knowledge, and this is made possible with a research report. A research report serves as a means to effectively communicate the findings of a systematic investigation to all and sundry.  
• Identification of Knowledge Gaps: With a research report, you’d be able to identify knowledge gaps for further inquiry. A research report shows what has been done while hinting at other areas needing systematic investigation. 
• In market research, a research report would help you understand the market needs and peculiarities at a glance. 
• A research report allows you to present information in a precise and concise manner. 
• It is time-efficient and practical because, in a research report, you do not have to spend time detailing the findings of your research work in person. You can easily send out the report via email and have stakeholders look at it. 

Guide to Writing a Research Report

A lot of detail goes into writing a research report, and getting familiar with the different requirements would help you create the ideal research report. A research report is usually broken down into multiple sections, which allows for a concise presentation of information.

Structure and Example of a Research Report

This is the title of your systematic investigation. Your title should be concise and point to the aims, objectives, and findings of a research report. 

• Table of Contents

This is like a compass that makes it easier for readers to navigate the research report.

An abstract is an overview that highlights all important aspects of the research including the research method, data collection process, and research findings. Think of an abstract as a summary of your research report that presents pertinent information in a concise manner. 

An abstract is always brief; typically 100-150 words and goes straight to the point. The focus of your research abstract should be the 5Ws and 1H format – What, Where, Why, When, Who and How. 

• Introduction

Here, the researcher highlights the aims and objectives of the systematic investigation as well as the problem which the systematic investigation sets out to solve. When writing the report introduction, it is also essential to indicate whether the purposes of the research were achieved or would require more work.

In the introduction section, the researcher specifies the research problem and also outlines the significance of the systematic investigation. Also, the researcher is expected to outline any jargons and terminologies that are contained in the research.  

• Literature Review

A literature review is a written survey of existing knowledge in the field of study. In other words, it is the section where you provide an overview and analysis of different research works that are relevant to your systematic investigation. 

It highlights existing research knowledge and areas needing further investigation, which your research has sought to fill. At this stage, you can also hint at your research hypothesis and its possible implications for the existing body of knowledge in your field of study. 

• An Account of Investigation

This is a detailed account of the research process, including the methodology, sample, and research subjects. Here, you are expected to provide in-depth information on the research process including the data collection and analysis procedures. 

In a quantitative research report, you’d need to provide information surveys, questionnaires and other quantitative data collection methods used in your research. In a qualitative research report, you are expected to describe the qualitative data collection methods used in your research including interviews and focus groups. 

In this section, you are expected to present the results of the systematic investigation. 

This section further explains the findings of the research, earlier outlined. Here, you are expected to present a justification for each outcome and show whether the results are in line with your hypotheses or if other research studies have come up with similar results.

• Conclusions

This is a summary of all the information in the report. It also outlines the significance of the entire study. 

• References and Appendices

This section contains a list of all the primary and secondary research sources. 

Tips for Writing a Research Report

• Define the Context for the Report

As is obtainable when writing an essay, defining the context for your research report would help you create a detailed yet concise document. This is why you need to create an outline before writing so that you do not miss out on anything. 

• Define your Audience

Writing with your audience in mind is essential as it determines the tone of the report. If you’re writing for a general audience, you would want to present the information in a simple and relatable manner. For a specialized audience, you would need to make use of technical and field-specific terms. 

• Include Significant Findings

The idea of a research report is to present some sort of abridged version of your systematic investigation. In your report, you should exclude irrelevant information while highlighting only important data and findings. 

• Include Illustrations

Your research report should include illustrations and other visual representations of your data. Graphs, pie charts, and relevant images lend additional credibility to your systematic investigation.

• Choose the Right Title

A good research report title is brief, precise, and contains keywords from your research. It should provide a clear idea of your systematic investigation so that readers can grasp the entire focus of your research from the title. 

• Proofread the Report

Before publishing the document, ensure that you give it a second look to authenticate the information. If you can, get someone else to go through the report, too, and you can also run it through proofreading and editing software. 

How to Gather Research Data for Your Report  

• Understand the Problem

Every research aims at solving a specific problem or set of problems, and this should be at the back of your mind when writing your research report. Understanding the problem would help you to filter the information you have and include only important data in your report. 

• Know what your report seeks to achieve

This is somewhat similar to the point above because, in some way, the aim of your research report is intertwined with the objectives of your systematic investigation. Identifying the primary purpose of writing a research report would help you to identify and present the required information accordingly. 

• Identify your audience

Knowing your target audience plays a crucial role in data collection for a research report. If your research report is specifically for an organization, you would want to present industry-specific information or show how the research findings are relevant to the work that the company does. 

• Create Surveys/Questionnaires

A survey is a research method that is used to gather data from a specific group of people through a set of questions. It can be either quantitative or qualitative. 

A survey is usually made up of structured questions, and it can be administered online or offline. However, an online survey is a more effective method of research data collection because it helps you save time and gather data with ease. 

You can seamlessly create an online questionnaire for your research on Formplus . With the multiple sharing options available in the builder, you would be able to administer your survey to respondents in little or no time. 

Formplus also has a report summary too l that you can use to create custom visual reports for your research.

Step-by-step guide on how to create an online questionnaire using Formplus  

• Sign into Formplus

In the Formplus builder, you can easily create different online questionnaires for your research by dragging and dropping preferred fields into your form. To access the Formplus builder, you will need to create an account on Formplus. 

Once you do this, sign in to your account and click on Create new form to begin. 

• Edit Form Title : Click on the field provided to input your form title, for example, “Research Questionnaire.”
• Edit Form : Click on the edit icon to edit the form.
• Add Fields : Drag and drop preferred form fields into your form in the Formplus builder inputs column. There are several field input options for questionnaires in the Formplus builder. 
• Edit fields
• Click on “Save”
• Form Customization: With the form customization options in the form builder, you can easily change the outlook of your form and make it more unique and personalized. Formplus allows you to change your form theme, add background images, and even change the font according to your needs. 
• Multiple Sharing Options: Formplus offers various form-sharing options, which enables you to share your questionnaire with respondents easily. You can use the direct social media sharing buttons to share your form link to your organization’s social media pages.  You can also send out your survey form as email invitations to your research subjects too. If you wish, you can share your form’s QR code or embed it on your organization’s website for easy access. 

Conclusion  

Always remember that a research report is just as important as the actual systematic investigation because it plays a vital role in communicating research findings to everyone else. This is why you must take care to create a concise document summarizing the process of conducting any research. 

In this article, we’ve outlined essential tips to help you create a research report. When writing your report, you should always have the audience at the back of your mind, as this would set the tone for the document. 

Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!

• ethnographic research survey
• research report
• research report survey
• busayo.longe

You may also like:

Assessment Tools: Types, Examples & Importance

In this article, you’ll learn about different assessment tools to help you evaluate performance in various contexts

Ethnographic Research: Types, Methods + [Question Examples]

Simple guide on ethnographic research, it types, methods, examples and advantages. Also highlights how to conduct an ethnographic...

How to Write a Problem Statement for your Research

Learn how to write problem statements before commencing any research effort. Learn about its structure and explore examples

21 Chrome Extensions for Academic Researchers in 2022

In this article, we will discuss a number of chrome extensions you can use to make your research process even seamless

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..

• How it works

How to Write the Dissertation Findings or Results – Steps & Tips

Published by Grace Graffin at August 11th, 2021 , Revised On October 9, 2023

Each  part of the dissertation is unique, and some general and specific rules must be followed. The dissertation’s findings section presents the key results of your research without interpreting their meaning .

Theoretically, this is an exciting section of a dissertation because it involves writing what you have observed and found. However, it can be a little tricky if there is too much information to confuse the readers.

The goal is to include only the essential and relevant findings in this section. The results must be presented in an orderly sequence to provide clarity to the readers.

This section of the dissertation should be easy for the readers to follow, so you should avoid going into a lengthy debate over the interpretation of the results.

It is vitally important to focus only on clear and precise observations. The findings chapter of the  dissertation  is theoretically the easiest to write.

It includes  statistical analysis and a brief write-up about whether or not the results emerging from the analysis are significant. This segment should be written in the past sentence as you describe what you have done in the past.

This article will provide detailed information about  how to   write the findings of a dissertation .

When to Write Dissertation Findings Chapter

As soon as you have gathered and analysed your data, you can start to write up the findings chapter of your dissertation paper. Remember that it is your chance to report the most notable findings of your research work and relate them to the research hypothesis  or  research questions set out in  the introduction chapter of the dissertation .

You will be required to separately report your study’s findings before moving on to the discussion chapter  if your dissertation is based on the  collection of primary data  or experimental work.

However, you may not be required to have an independent findings chapter if your dissertation is purely descriptive and focuses on the analysis of case studies or interpretation of texts.

• Always report the findings of your research in the past tense.
• The dissertation findings chapter varies from one project to another, depending on the data collected and analyzed.
• Avoid reporting results that are not relevant to your research questions or research hypothesis.

Does your Dissertation Have the Following?

• Great Research/Sources
• Perfect Language
• Accurate Sources

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

1. Reporting Quantitative Findings

The best way to present your quantitative findings is to structure them around the research  hypothesis or  questions you intend to address as part of your dissertation project.

Report the relevant findings for each research question or hypothesis, focusing on how you analyzed them.

Analysis of your findings will help you determine how they relate to the different research questions and whether they support the hypothesis you formulated.

While you must highlight meaningful relationships, variances, and tendencies, it is important not to guess their interpretations and implications because this is something to save for the discussion  and  conclusion  chapters.

Any findings not directly relevant to your research questions or explanations concerning the data collection process  should be added to the dissertation paper’s appendix section.

Use of Figures and Tables in Dissertation Findings

Suppose your dissertation is based on quantitative research. In that case, it is important to include charts, graphs, tables, and other visual elements to help your readers understand the emerging trends and relationships in your findings.

Repeating information will give the impression that you are short on ideas. Refer to all charts, illustrations, and tables in your writing but avoid recurrence.

The text should be used only to elaborate and summarize certain parts of your results. On the other hand, illustrations and tables are used to present multifaceted data.

It is recommended to give descriptive labels and captions to all illustrations used so the readers can figure out what each refers to.

How to Report Quantitative Findings

Here is an example of how to report quantitative results in your dissertation findings chapter;

Two hundred seventeen participants completed both the pretest and post-test and a Pairwise T-test was used for the analysis. The quantitative data analysis reveals a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the pretest and posttest scales from the Teachers Discovering Computers course. The pretest mean was 29.00 with a standard deviation of 7.65, while the posttest mean was 26.50 with a standard deviation of 9.74 (Table 1). These results yield a significance level of .000, indicating a strong treatment effect (see Table 3). With the correlation between the scores being .448, the little relationship is seen between the pretest and posttest scores (Table 2). This leads the researcher to conclude that the impact of the course on the educators’ perception and integration of technology into the curriculum is dramatic.

Paired Samples

Paired samples correlation, paired samples test.

Also Read: How to Write the Abstract for the Dissertation.

2. Reporting Qualitative Findings

A notable issue with reporting qualitative findings is that not all results directly relate to your research questions or hypothesis.

The best way to present the results of qualitative research is to frame your findings around the most critical areas or themes you obtained after you examined the data.

In-depth data analysis will help you observe what the data shows for each theme. Any developments, relationships, patterns, and independent responses directly relevant to your research question or hypothesis should be mentioned to the readers.

Additional information not directly relevant to your research can be included in the appendix .

How to Report Qualitative Findings

Here is an example of how to report qualitative results in your dissertation findings chapter;

How do I report quantitative findings?

The best way to present your quantitative findings is to structure them around the  research hypothesis  or  research questions  you intended to address as part of your dissertation project. Report the relevant findings for each of the research questions or hypotheses, focusing on how you analyzed them.

How do I report qualitative findings?

The best way to present the  qualitative research  results is to frame your findings around the most important areas or themes that you obtained after examining the data.

An in-depth analysis of the data will help you observe what the data is showing for each theme. Any developments, relationships, patterns, and independent responses that are directly relevant to your  research question  or  hypothesis  should be clearly mentioned for the readers.

Can I use interpretive phrases like ‘it confirms’ in the finding chapter?

No, It is highly advisable to avoid using interpretive and subjective phrases in the finding chapter. These terms are more suitable for the  discussion chapter , where you will be expected to provide your interpretation of the results in detail.

Can I report the results from other research papers in my findings chapter?

NO, you must not be presenting results from other research studies in your findings.

You May Also Like

Writing a dissertation can be tough if this is the first time you are doing it. You need to look into relevant literature, analyze past researches, conduct surveys, interviews etc.

Your dissertation introduction chapter provides detailed information on the research problem, significance of research, and research aim & objectives.

Appendices or Appendixes are used to provide additional date related to your dissertation research project. Here we explain what is appendix in dissertation

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 7. The Results
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

The results section is where you report the findings of your study based upon the methodology [or methodologies] you applied to gather information. The results section should state the findings of the research arranged in a logical sequence without bias or interpretation. A section describing results should be particularly detailed if your paper includes data generated from your own research.

Annesley, Thomas M. "Show Your Cards: The Results Section and the Poker Game." Clinical Chemistry 56 (July 2010): 1066-1070.

Importance of a Good Results Section

When formulating the results section, it's important to remember that the results of a study do not prove anything . Findings can only confirm or reject the hypothesis underpinning your study. However, the act of articulating the results helps you to understand the problem from within, to break it into pieces, and to view the research problem from various perspectives.

The page length of this section is set by the amount and types of data to be reported . Be concise. Use non-textual elements appropriately, such as figures and tables, to present findings more effectively. In deciding what data to describe in your results section, you must clearly distinguish information that would normally be included in a research paper from any raw data or other content that could be included as an appendix. In general, raw data that has not been summarized should not be included in the main text of your paper unless requested to do so by your professor.

Avoid providing data that is not critical to answering the research question . The background information you described in the introduction section should provide the reader with any additional context or explanation needed to understand the results. A good strategy is to always re-read the background section of your paper after you have written up your results to ensure that the reader has enough context to understand the results [and, later, how you interpreted the results in the discussion section of your paper that follows].

Bavdekar, Sandeep B. and Sneha Chandak. "Results: Unraveling the Findings." Journal of the Association of Physicians of India 63 (September 2015): 44-46; Brett, Paul. "A Genre Analysis of the Results Section of Sociology Articles." English for Specific Speakers 13 (1994): 47-59; Go to English for Specific Purposes on ScienceDirect;Burton, Neil et al. Doing Your Education Research Project . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2008; Results. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College; Kretchmer, Paul. Twelve Steps to Writing an Effective Results Section. San Francisco Edit; "Reporting Findings." In Making Sense of Social Research Malcolm Williams, editor. (London;: SAGE Publications, 2003) pp. 188-207.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Organization and Approach

For most research papers in the social and behavioral sciences, there are two possible ways of organizing the results . Both approaches are appropriate in how you report your findings, but use only one approach.

• Present a synopsis of the results followed by an explanation of key findings . This approach can be used to highlight important findings. For example, you may have noticed an unusual correlation between two variables during the analysis of your findings. It is appropriate to highlight this finding in the results section. However, speculating as to why this correlation exists and offering a hypothesis about what may be happening belongs in the discussion section of your paper.
• Present a result and then explain it, before presenting the next result then explaining it, and so on, then end with an overall synopsis . This is the preferred approach if you have multiple results of equal significance. It is more common in longer papers because it helps the reader to better understand each finding. In this model, it is helpful to provide a brief conclusion that ties each of the findings together and provides a narrative bridge to the discussion section of the your paper.

NOTE :   Just as the literature review should be arranged under conceptual categories rather than systematically describing each source, you should also organize your findings under key themes related to addressing the research problem. This can be done under either format noted above [i.e., a thorough explanation of the key results or a sequential, thematic description and explanation of each finding].

II.  Content

In general, the content of your results section should include the following:

• Introductory context for understanding the results by restating the research problem underpinning your study . This is useful in re-orientating the reader's focus back to the research problem after having read a review of the literature and your explanation of the methods used for gathering and analyzing information.
• Inclusion of non-textual elements, such as, figures, charts, photos, maps, tables, etc. to further illustrate key findings, if appropriate . Rather than relying entirely on descriptive text, consider how your findings can be presented visually. This is a helpful way of condensing a lot of data into one place that can then be referred to in the text. Consider referring to appendices if there is a lot of non-textual elements.
• A systematic description of your results, highlighting for the reader observations that are most relevant to the topic under investigation . Not all results that emerge from the methodology used to gather information may be related to answering the " So What? " question. Do not confuse observations with interpretations; observations in this context refers to highlighting important findings you discovered through a process of reviewing prior literature and gathering data.
• The page length of your results section is guided by the amount and types of data to be reported . However, focus on findings that are important and related to addressing the research problem. It is not uncommon to have unanticipated results that are not relevant to answering the research question. This is not to say that you don't acknowledge tangential findings and, in fact, can be referred to as areas for further research in the conclusion of your paper. However, spending time in the results section describing tangential findings clutters your overall results section and distracts the reader.
• A short paragraph that concludes the results section by synthesizing the key findings of the study . Highlight the most important findings you want readers to remember as they transition into the discussion section. This is particularly important if, for example, there are many results to report, the findings are complicated or unanticipated, or they are impactful or actionable in some way [i.e., able to be pursued in a feasible way applied to practice].

NOTE:   Always use the past tense when referring to your study's findings. Reference to findings should always be described as having already happened because the method used to gather the information has been completed.

III.  Problems to Avoid

When writing the results section, avoid doing the following :

• Discussing or interpreting your results . Save this for the discussion section of your paper, although where appropriate, you should compare or contrast specific results to those found in other studies [e.g., "Similar to the work of Smith [1990], one of the findings of this study is the strong correlation between motivation and academic achievement...."].
• Reporting background information or attempting to explain your findings. This should have been done in your introduction section, but don't panic! Often the results of a study point to the need for additional background information or to explain the topic further, so don't think you did something wrong. Writing up research is rarely a linear process. Always revise your introduction as needed.
• Ignoring negative results . A negative result generally refers to a finding that does not support the underlying assumptions of your study. Do not ignore them. Document these findings and then state in your discussion section why you believe a negative result emerged from your study. Note that negative results, and how you handle them, can give you an opportunity to write a more engaging discussion section, therefore, don't be hesitant to highlight them.
• Including raw data or intermediate calculations . Ask your professor if you need to include any raw data generated by your study, such as transcripts from interviews or data files. If raw data is to be included, place it in an appendix or set of appendices that are referred to in the text.
• Be as factual and concise as possible in reporting your findings . Do not use phrases that are vague or non-specific, such as, "appeared to be greater than other variables..." or "demonstrates promising trends that...." Subjective modifiers should be explained in the discussion section of the paper [i.e., why did one variable appear greater? Or, how does the finding demonstrate a promising trend?].
• Presenting the same data or repeating the same information more than once . If you want to highlight a particular finding, it is appropriate to do so in the results section. However, you should emphasize its significance in relation to addressing the research problem in the discussion section. Do not repeat it in your results section because you can do that in the conclusion of your paper.
• Confusing figures with tables . Be sure to properly label any non-textual elements in your paper. Don't call a chart an illustration or a figure a table. If you are not sure, go here .

Annesley, Thomas M. "Show Your Cards: The Results Section and the Poker Game." Clinical Chemistry 56 (July 2010): 1066-1070; Bavdekar, Sandeep B. and Sneha Chandak. "Results: Unraveling the Findings." Journal of the Association of Physicians of India 63 (September 2015): 44-46; Burton, Neil et al. Doing Your Education Research Project . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2008;  Caprette, David R. Writing Research Papers. Experimental Biosciences Resources. Rice University; Hancock, Dawson R. and Bob Algozzine. Doing Case Study Research: A Practical Guide for Beginning Researchers . 2nd ed. New York: Teachers College Press, 2011; Introduction to Nursing Research: Reporting Research Findings. Nursing Research: Open Access Nursing Research and Review Articles. (January 4, 2012); Kretchmer, Paul. Twelve Steps to Writing an Effective Results Section. San Francisco Edit ; Ng, K. H. and W. C. Peh. "Writing the Results." Singapore Medical Journal 49 (2008): 967-968; Reporting Research Findings. Wilder Research, in partnership with the Minnesota Department of Human Services. (February 2009); Results. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College; Schafer, Mickey S. Writing the Results. Thesis Writing in the Sciences. Course Syllabus. University of Florida.

Writing Tip

Why Don't I Just Combine the Results Section with the Discussion Section?

It's not unusual to find articles in scholarly social science journals where the author(s) have combined a description of the findings with a discussion about their significance and implications. You could do this. However, if you are inexperienced writing research papers, consider creating two distinct sections for each section in your paper as a way to better organize your thoughts and, by extension, your paper. Think of the results section as the place where you report what your study found; think of the discussion section as the place where you interpret the information and answer the "So What?" question. As you become more skilled writing research papers, you can consider melding the results of your study with a discussion of its implications.

Driscoll, Dana Lynn and Aleksandra Kasztalska. Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University.

• << Previous: Insiderness
• Next: Using Non-Textual Elements >>
• Last Updated: Apr 16, 2024 10:20 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Writing up a Research Report

• First Online: 04 January 2024

Cite this chapter

• Stefan Hunziker 3 &
• Michael Blankenagel 3  

298 Accesses

A research report is one big argument about how and why you came up with your conclusions. To make it a convincing argument, a typical guiding structure has developed. In the different chapters, there are distinct issues that need to be addressed to explain to the reader why your conclusions are valid. The governing principle for writing the report is full disclosure: to explain everything and ensure replicability by another researcher.

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

Access this chapter

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

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Barros, L. O. (2016). The only academic phrasebook you’ll ever need . Createspace Independent Publishing Platform.

Google Scholar  

Field, A. (2016). An adventure in statistics. The reality enigma . SAGE.

Field, A. (2020). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE.

Früh, M., Keimer, I., & Blankenagel, M. (2019). The impact of Balanced Scorecard excellence on shareholder returns. IFZ Working Paper No. 0003/2019. https://zenodo.org/record/2571603#.YMDUafkzZaQ . Accessed: 9 June 2021.

Pearl, J., & Mackenzie, D. (2018). The book of why: The new science of cause and effect. Basic Books.

Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). SAGE.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Wirtschaft/IFZ, Campus Zug-Rotkreuz, Hochschule Luzern, Zug-Rotkreuz, Zug, Switzerland

Stefan Hunziker & Michael Blankenagel

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Hunziker .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Hunziker, S., Blankenagel, M. (2024). Writing up a Research Report. In: Research Design in Business and Management. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42739-9_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42739-9_4

Published : 04 January 2024

Publisher Name : Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

Print ISBN : 978-3-658-42738-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-658-42739-9

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Writing and Publishing Your Research Findings

Charles t. quinn.

* Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, TX

† Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, TX

A. John Rush

‡ Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, TX

§ Clinical Sciences, Duke-National University of Singapore, Singapore

Writing clearly is critical to the success of your scientific career. Unfortunately, this skill is not taught in medical school or postgraduate training. This article summarizes our approach to the writing and publication of your research. Here we focus on empirical or experimental reports of translational and clinically oriented research. We review the process of choosing what to write, how to write it clearly, and how to navigate the process of submission and publication.

INTRODUCTION

Articulate writing is critical to scientific success.

This article summarizes material presented in a course that we have taught at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas. The material is a synthesis of material from a variety of sources (see References), to which we have added our own, sometimes idiosyncratic, suggestions for developing peer-reviewed journal reports of clinical and translational research. We particularly want to acknowledge Essentials of Writing Biomedical Research Papers by Mimi Zeiger 1 at the University of California at San Francisco, whose book we highly recommend.

Writing clearly and accurately is critical to the success of your scientific career. If you do not write clearly, your article will not be cited. If you are not cited, you will not get promoted. If you do not get promoted, you will not have a job. Writing clearly to maximize your likelihood of being cited by others is key to your scientific survival. Published research is your only final product. A poorly written report could mean that you have wasted years conducting your study, because what you have done will not be cited or known. As such, it will not impact the field. The threat of career failure should be a powerful motivator for writing clearly, as is doing the very best science that one can.

Each article tells a story, but there is no “one true path” to writing. We each learn how to use our talents, overcome our deficiencies, and develop our skills differently. Each article we write is less difficult, but none is ever easy. To avoid feeling overwhelmed by the effort, we suggest that you approach writing as a series of questions to be clearly answered. What was the research question? Why does the answer matter? What was done? What was found? Has anyone else found that (or not)? What might it mean? What limitations or qualifications apply to the findings?

Define What to Report

What are you going to write? Obviously, the primary paper focuses on the main hypotheses that you tested. But there may be several secondary hypotheses and maybe a couple of tertiary papers that are hypothesis generating. But be careful. Do not write trivial papers (third-rate papers with too small samples). They take too much time, are not cited, and have minimal to no payoff.

So, consider at the outset what aspects of the project are to be submitted, where, and in what order. What is the primary paper? Are there secondary papers? Clinical investigation often requires many people, so consider which colleagues might like to take the lead on a secondary paper. That is, depending on the size of the study and the contributions, needs, and expertise of your multidisciplinary research team, think about additional papers for others than yourself.

Getting Started

How often have you heard, “I have writer’s block”? What does that mean? Everybody who has attended medical, dental, or nursing school can write. Thus, “writer’s block” is a fiction— an excuse. The underlying fear may be that either one cannot think clearly enough to be able to say what was done (in which case, a career change is indicated!) or one is afraid that the product will not be “good enough” and therefore procrastinates.

To overcome “writer’s block,” simply realize at the outset that most of the words in the first draft will not make it to the final draft. Once you have something on paper, however, you can edit it—repeatedly. To get it on paper, dictate, type, or handwrite it (whatever is fastest for you). We recommend that you start with an outline. The outline is straightforward: title, abstract, introduction, methods, results (with tables and figures), discussion, conclusions, references, acknowledgements, and disclosures. Then write a topic sentence for each paragraph in each section. The outline and the topic sentences should take you about an hour-and-a-half to write. Then start to write each paragraph in the 4 key sections (introduction, methods, results, and discussion).

One place to begin is with the protocol that you followed to conduct the study. The protocol contains the aims, hypotheses/questions, rationale, and methods. Thus, the protocol is the basis for the first drafts of the introduction and methods. You may need to update the significance (to beef up the introduction) and to cite the newest relevant literature. Borrow from what you have done to begin.

Recall that journals limit articles to 3000 to 4000 words. If each paragraph has 200 words, you have to write 18 to 20 paragraphs ( Table 1 ). The introduction has 3 to 4 paragraphs (never longer than 2 manuscript pages); discussion has 5; results typically has 4 to 6, depending on the number of questions; leaving 5 to 6 for methods. Once you break it down this way, it does not seem so bad.

The Main Elements of a Manuscript

Prepare to Spend Time

Realize that writing takes a lot of time. You must set aside uninterrupted time, which in our view is best inserted between other activities that do not involve writing. Write for a while, then stop and leave it alone. When you go back later, you will be more objective and be better able to edit your prior work. Too many people frustrate themselves by expecting to write up 4 years of work in 4 weeks. That is not realistic, especially if you have not written many prior papers, if you have other duties, or both. So think about what you want to produce and divide the work into “doable” pieces (eg, the major sections noted above). Allocate a fixed amount of uninterrupted time each day to work on 1 section at a time to assemble these pieces without regard to how well it is written and without thinking about references. Simply tell the story.

Tell the Story

Look at the big picture first. Recall that you know more about what you have done than anybody else, so do not get nervous. You know the story—what you did and why you did it. Writing the first draft should not be a big thing. Polishing your drafts is where the time is.

The most important thing is to tell the story. Most people get stuck in the details and lose track of the story. Readers want to know what the issues were, why they matter, and what questions were asked (introduction). Then how were the issues addressed, questions answered, and hypotheses tested (methods)? Next, what were the answers (results)? The results section is divided into subheadings, often based on the questions or hypotheses at the end of the introduction. A table or figure should accompany each question. Finally, what do you make of the results (discussion)? These are the major sections of each empirical report for scientific journals ( Tables 1 and ​ and2 2 ).

Elements of the Story Line

Recall for Whom You Are Writing

Do not write your paper for scientists, colleagues, the promotion and tenure committee, or your department chair. Tell the story as if you were talking to somebody who is not an expert in your area. If you make the article that simple and straightforward, readers will be able to understand what you did and be able to cite the paper. If you use a lot of jargon, compound sentences, or obscure wording, only you and your coauthors will actually know what you are saying.

Table 3 highlights the most common reasons for rejection/revision. Most of these issues can be addressed by being pithy (succinct but full of substance and meaning) and consistent. Sentences should be simple: subject, verb, object, period. Whenever possible, avoid compound sentences. Do not change terminology throughout the paper (eg, do not interchangeably use subjects, participants, patients, or volunteers). Readers will wonder why you changed the names. Whatever word or phrase you use to describe something, keep using the same term. This is not an English essay or creative-writing class. A scientific article uses an expository writing style—it simply tells the facts. The reader needs specificity, clarity, and brevity—not engaging phraseology. Be very specific. Avoid general statements such as, “The patients improved.” What does that mean? Better to say something like “Patients in group A had a greater reduction in X than did patients in group B; test, P value (Table X).” Finally, physicians tend to be pompous in their style of writing. Avoid this; it prevents clear communication. Invest in a guide to clear medical writing to help. 2

Common Reasons for Rejection or Revision

Let us now consider each element in a manuscript.

THE MANUSCRIPT

The title should have 12 words or fewer (pithy). Notice that movies do not have long titles. The Fugitive . Not Escaping Jail Following an Unfair Conviction in Chicago . Just The Fugitive .

Do not say: “A study of X.” Of course it is a study. That wastes words. Begin the title with a key word. Be to the point. Grab the reader’s attention. Table 4 lists characteristics of a good title.

Characteristics of a Good Title

There are 2 kinds of abstracts: structured and unstructured. Structured abstracts have distinct subsections: objectives, methods, results, and conclusions (these may vary by journal). Unstructured abstracts contain the same information, but are just 1 long paragraph.

Most people do not read an entire article. Everyone reads the abstract. So whatever is in the abstract is what everyone thinks is in the article. Therefore, it is critical to edit, polish, and perfect the abstract, because it is almost the only information that readers will take home.

What is the state of knowledge? What was the question (background)? What did you do and how did you do it (methods)? What did you find (results)? What is the bottom line (conclusion)? That’s it!

We like to write the abstract first because it forces us to give the 10-second version of the paper. Then we polish it repeatedly after we write the article. The abstract will change a lot—often not substantively, but especially in terms of clarifying and simplifying the presentation. If you write your abstract first, you must ensure that it matches the final manuscript.

Introduction

At the beginning, tell the readers the problem ( Table 5 ). What do we know and what do we not know? Why does this matter? Then, what are the questions or hypotheses to be addressed or tested? What, in brief, was the approach?

The Introduction: Start Broadly, Then Narrow

The introduction should hook the reader. Paragraph no. 1: What is known? For example, “Diabetes is bad news, especially when it is associated with fatty liver.” Paragraph no. 2: What is unknown? For example, “We do not know how to treat patients with this complication.”

Paragraph no. 3: What is the question or hypothesis? “This study was conducted to determine whether A is better than B in improving fatty liver in patients with diabetes.” What was done? “We addressed this question by conducting a randomized controlled trial of A versus B in diabetic patients with fatty liver.” Be sure the introduction states your questions or hypotheses. End the introduction with a statement of your hypothesis: “We hypothesized that A was significantly better than B at decreasing fatty liver because….” Bingo, the introduction is done.

The introduction is NOT a literature review. Do not over-reference. Seven to 10 references are plenty. Less experienced writers seem to feel the need to cite the entire literature before getting to the methods. Do not. Everybody will trust that you can read. What they want to know is what was the issue. Why is it important? How did you approach the problem?

A poorly written methods section is a major reason for rejection. Be specific. Give details. Readers must know what you did. Remember, someone may try to replicate what you did! If the replication fails, your credibility is questioned. Give enough detail to ensure that another scientist can replicate exactly what you did. Give no more detail than is necessary, but give all the details that are required for replication.

The methods section is typically in chronological order. What did you do first? Then what did you do? Methods can be dense. Use subheadings in the text to guide the reader. Table 6 lists common elements (subheadings) of methods.

Common Elements of the Methods

First, provide the study overview. What was the design? When was the study done? Where was it done? For example, “We conducted a multicenter randomized clinical trial of drug A versus placebo for 6 months in participants with type 2 diabetes and fatty liver.” This brief, 30,000-ft overview primes the reader for the dense (but clear) text that follows.

Then provide the details ( Table 6 ). How did you recruit the sample? Consecutive? When you felt like it? How did you define who is eligible? When did the study start and stop? And so on. Do not include results in the methods section. The rules for obtaining the sample are in methods. The sample that you obtained by using these rules is described in the first paragraph of results. 3 , 4 It is very important to say how the current sample relates to other reports of the same or related samples. Be very clear about whether patients in your study were or were not included in any prior reports. People doing meta-analyses or literature reviews, for example, must know whether the present sample is distinct or not from other samples. Surprisingly, you often cannot tell whether 2 reported samples are partially overlapping, the same, or distinct.

Describe where the study was conducted. Define all the variables used in the report, but none of the variables not in the report. Sometimes you might collect variables not included in this report. If they are in another report, you do not have to put them in this report.

What was the rationale for the randomization? Was it stratified? Was it computer based or did you use a table? Did you randomize in blocks? What was the informed consent process? Was there institutional review board or data safety monitoring board oversight? Were measurements blinded? Who was blinded and how?

How did you deliver the treatment of interest? How often were they treated? Who provided the treatment? How else were they managed? Could there be home visits? Could there be extra visits? Be very specific.

Did you assess whether patients adhered to treatment? If so, how? Did you ask them, count pills, or use MEMS caps?

How did you ensure that the people who delivered the study treatment did what they were supposed to do? Was there a manual? Was there quality control?

How were concomitant medicines managed? What rescue treatments or other efforts were used when patients worsened?

What were your outcomes or end points? Which was your primary outcome? Which were secondary? Who measured or obtained the end points? How? When? Was there quality control for these measures? Who did it? How? How often?

What sample size did you use? What kind of difference did you expect? What difference was expected? Did you power the study to detect this difference? What is the power? Why did you choose the statistical tests you did? Who did the analyses? Finally, it is very important that your coauthors see the data and have some discussion with the statistician so they really understand how the study was analyzed. You have to assume that your coauthors are going to make slides from this study and present it somewhere. If they do not understand the analysis, the audience will not. And they will be misinformed, unfairly judge your study, or both.

When writing the results, we first build the tables and figures. Then we write the text to tell the story, answering the study questions, around the tables and figures. The text of results is often brief because the tables and figures provide the findings. Be pithy. The less you elaborate, the clearer you will be. You want the bottom line to be very, very clear. Remember, results is for the results. The introduction tells readers why you did the study. How you arrived at the results is in methods. What the results mean is in discussion.

Start with the results of the most important question, then the second most important, and so on. Or organize the section chronologically. Use subheadings to denote each question or section. There should be no interpretation of findings in results. Make the results exciting, but do not hype. Table 7 lists important points to consider when writing this section.

The Results

If your patient sample is not extremely simple in composition, use a CONSORT chart. 3 , 4 This chart explicitly and clearly shows how you obtained the evaluable sample. It will save you many words. Journals may require this chart, especially for clinical trials. If 2 (or more) groups were compared, describe and compare these groups at baseline. Serious adverse events, tolerability, attrition, and dosing may be in subsequent tables. Describe patients sensitively. People are not schizophrenics or diabetics. They are patients with schizophrenia or diabetes. They are participants, not subjects. Why participants? Because they chose to participate by giving consent. Subjects, such as rats, do not give consent. 5

It is critical that the tables and figures carry the message. Do not repeat in the text what is in the tables and figures. Why? People can read the tables and figures. Use the text to direct the reader to the tables and figures. A sentence or 2 in the text to draw attention to a few key findings might be useful in the results section, but do not comment on every item in each table.

Tables and Figures

Figures and tables should stand alone. That is, each should be understood without reference to the text. The text simply alerts the reader when to look for them. So, if you use abbreviations or acronyms here, spell them out in the footnotes and legends. A figure has a title and legend that explains it; a table has a title and footnotes, if necessary, but no legend. Each figure or table should be on a separate sheet of paper. Remember, readers may use your tables and figures as slides. Make them clear and self-contained so that the slide has meaning.

Provide clear names for each column of your table. The study variables (eg, age, sex, severe adverse events, remission rates) are typically in the leftmost column, and each defines a row. The data are in the columns to the right. Avoid vertical lines in tables. The rows should have few to no horizontal lines.

Whenever you use a percentage in tables (and elsewhere), give the numerator and denominator so the reader can see how you derived it. We like to put significant P values in bold, but always follow journal style. Give the actual P value, not “NS” or “<0.05.” Only use decimal places that are informative. For example, nobody knows what 48.134 years of age means. Report 48.1 years. Keep it simple.

Good figures are worth a thousand words and probably several tables. Figures should show your primary comparisons. The reader should be able to look at the figures and tables and know what the questions and answers are without reading the text. Avoid 3-dimensional figures and gratuitous color and shading. Most of the ink used to print your table should represent your data, not explanatory or decorative material. Creating clear and meaningful figures is a skill one learns. Practice it. Texts by Tufte 6 and Goodman and Edwards 2 can aid you in good design.

Next to the abstract, we find the discussion to be the most difficult part to write. We may be excited about what we have found and have lots to say about it. This may make the discussion wander. Here is a way to organize the discussion ( Table 8 ).

Elements of the Discussion

The first paragraph summarizes what you found. “This study was designed to determine whether A is better than B with regard to X. We found A was better than B in terms of tolerability, side effects, and remission rates, but not in terms of Y.” If there was a second question, then the findings follow in the same first paragraph. You told them the questions (hypotheses) at the end of the introduction. Now, you summarize the answers. Avoid repeating the results; you just stated them.

The second paragraph of discussion addresses the question: “Has anybody else found anything like or different from what you found?” That is, how does it compare to the literature? If your findings are different, why? Is it the method, the sample, or measurement differences?

The third paragraph addresses the theoretical or clinical implications of the findings. What do these results mean about the utility or mechanisms of the study treatment or the pathophysiology of the disease being studied?

The fourth paragraph highlights limitations (and strengths). Limitations commonly include design, methods, generalizability, and internal validity. How certain are you about the results? A small study cannot be generalized. Measurements may have been too infrequent or too insensitive to detect an effect. Attrition may have been high. How does that affect certainty? Do not overstate the certainty of your findings. If you do not acknowledge the limitations of your report, the reviewers will make you. This is low-hanging fruit. Do not give reviewers the opportunity. Be honest, but this is your chance to frame the limitations in the best light. Remember, all studies have weaknesses. Do not feel embarrassed to list and discuss them. If your study has particular strengths, you may also highlight them here. This may soften the blow of the limitations.

Conclusions are pithy. Three sentences are enough—only 1 paragraph. A conclusion is: “A is better than B for these kinds of patients. This conclusion is limited by X and Y.” Some journals like you to suggest policy, economic, or practice implications—this is your final sentence: “Since X is better than Y and we have no other treatment for these patients, we recommend despite the limitations of this first trial that X might be a better treatment, but confirmatory studies are needed.” A common phrase that ends the conclusion is “more studies are needed.” Do not use it. More studies are always needed. Instead, state what studies you think are needed.

Leave the insertion of citations for the end. Where do references come up in the article? Largely in the introduction (7–10), methods (6–9), and discussion (15–20) (maximum, 30–40). The few references in the introduction should help lay out the problem and say why it is important. An introduction is NOT a literature review. The references in methods refer to measurements or techniques described in detail elsewhere. You do not have to describe them again; reference them.

If you use someone else’s idea, give appropriate credit. Remember, that person could be a reviewer. You do not have to cite everything, just that which is immediately relevant to support your point. Rely on peer-reviewed literature, reports, and reviews.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements are undervalued by authors but highly valued by colleagues. Be generous. Cite those people who substantially assisted in the project (eg, research assistants, key staff). Remember all the people who truly contributed to the success of the study, but who are not authors, and recognize them here.

Disclosures

Journals have different but increasingly strict rules about disclosure. Follow them closely. If you are in doubt about a relationship, disclose it. Only underdisclosing, not overdisclosing, will embarrass you.

GETTING IT PUBLISHED

This is a thorny issue. If you are the principal investigator, we strongly advise that you meet with your study team when you launch a study to talk about authorship. Consider who will write up the primary question and key secondary questions. Talk it through early, so everybody knows the expectations from the beginning. This is especially important for junior faculty who need to know, after spending a couple of years on the study, what are they going to get out of it.

Who is supposed to be an author? Most journals have specific requirements. Those who have contributed to the design and execution of the project and helped in developing the manuscript are logical possible coauthors. Just raising funds or being the chairman of the department does not qualify (use the acknowledgements for these individuals).

Typically, hired or support staff are not authors, but there may be exceptions, depending on their contributions. Students or fellows can certainly qualify if they make a substantive contribution either at the beginning, during the data analysis, or with the writing.

For large or multisite studies, it is extremely important to have a publication committee. Try to get on the publication committee. Some studies base authorship on enrollment, scientific expertise, execution of the study, and leadership. Have these discussions early and be up-front about authorship. Most people do not like to talk about authorship (as they do not like to talk about their salary). But you cannot be shy. Younger faculty need to be first, second, or third author. Beyond third author, you are “et al.” Last is for senior authors.

Rewrites are critical. There are many reasons to rewrite ( Table 9 ). We suggest that you go after specific targets with each rewrite. If you have coauthors, use them. The first author should not have to write everything if coauthors are to merit the recognition. Once you get a draft, share it with coauthors and direct each one to a task. “X, please revise the introduction.” “Y, please revise the methods.” You distribute the work and have it come back to you. You have final editorial say as the first author. It also helps you to see how your coauthors interpret what you have written, what questions they have, and what changes they suggest.

Reasons to Rewrite

When you ask coauthors to rewrite, set the time frame and tell them exactly what you want them to do. “Please give me feedback on the results section. Please review and revise within 7 days.” Everybody has a large pile of things to do. Without a scheduled time limit, the article goes to the bottom of the pile. Rewrite 1 section at a time. Sequence the writers, so somebody does one section and someone else does another. But remember, the manuscript should not read as if there was a different author for each section. So, you have to ensure that the entire text “flows” and is stylistically consistent.

Table 9 shows areas of attention for rewrites. Shorten the introduction. Polish the abstract. Shorten the discussion. Double-check the methods to be sure the words are totally explicit, specific, and detailed. Delete jargon. Delete words. Make sure your tables and figures, if read alone, tell the results all by themselves.

Outside Readers

Once you and coauthors have written the article to its “final version,” send it to 2 people who have no idea what you do, but who are intelligent and can communicate. They do not have to be experts in your area. Ask them to proofread the paper. Then ask them to tell you in their own words what you found. That way you will know whether they got the message.

Choosing a Journal

In choosing a journal, select one that is highly regarded with a high citation index. The journal content should match what you are reporting, so the readership will be interested in what you have to say. Some journals restrict length a lot—some less so, which might be a consideration in choosing a journal. Pick a journal as your first target that is bit of a long shot (sort of a stretch), but have in mind a second choice if the first rejects the paper. It is helpful if your second choice has similar requirements as the first. For example, you do not want to be limited to 4000 words for the first journal but to 2500 words for the second.

Rejections and Resubmissions

Rejections and negative reviews can be very frustrating. You may even feel angry or defeated. This is normal. Read the reviews through once, then put them aside for a while. If you are given the opportunity to resubmit, do not formulate your responses yet. Return several days later and read the reviews again. You will have a clearer mind then, and you will be less likely to respond angrily or with condescension. Some rejections are valid. Some are due to misunderstanding, which means that you were not clear. The reviewers took the time to read your article. If they did not “get it,” it is your writing.

Sometimes the editorial response highlights the problem and seems to say either “Please fix this and resubmit” or “It’s a long shot, but we’ll re-review it if you want to try—no guarantee though.” Always respond item-by-item to each of the reviewers’ comments in a detailed letter. Be careful with your tone. A negative tone in your responses will work against you. We like to write the response letter before revising the paper. Think through everything you want to do, then revise the paper and show your changes. Always include your coauthors in this process, because they are signing off on what you are resubmitting.

We hope this synopsis is helpful. It took 15 drafts. It could still be better. So, writing is never easy. But what you want to get back from the reviewers is “This is a clearly written, succinct report of X. I have some remaining questions….” No report is perfect. Recall that the reviewers are your helpers, but they cannot help improve your manuscript (or science) if you have not been clear in telling the story, specific in describing what you’ve done, and to the point throughout the paper. Good luck!

• Discoveries
• Right Journal
• Journal Metrics
• Journal Fit
• Abbreviation
• In-Text Citations
• Bibliographies
• Writing an Article
• Peer Review Types
• Acknowledgements
• Withdrawing a Paper
• Form Letter
• ISO, ANSI, CFR
• Google Scholar
• Journal Manuscript Editing
• Research Manuscript Editing

Book Editing

• Manuscript Editing Services

Medical Editing

• Bioscience Editing
• Physical Science Editing
• PhD Thesis Editing Services
• PhD Editing
• Master’s Proofreading
• Bachelor’s Editing
• Dissertation Proofreading Services
• Best Dissertation Proofreaders
• Masters Dissertation Proofreading
• PhD Proofreaders
• Proofreading PhD Thesis Price
• Journal Article Editing
• Book Editing Service
• Editing and Proofreading Services
• Research Paper Editing
• Medical Manuscript Editing
• Academic Editing
• Social Sciences Editing
• Academic Proofreading
• PhD Theses Editing
• Dissertation Proofreading
• Proofreading Rates UK
• Medical Proofreading
• PhD Proofreading Services UK
• Academic Proofreading Services UK

Medical Editing Services

• Life Science Editing
• Biomedical Editing
• Environmental Science Editing
• Pharmaceutical Science Editing
• Economics Editing
• Psychology Editing
• Sociology Editing
• Archaeology Editing
• History Paper Editing
• Anthropology Editing
• Law Paper Editing
• Engineering Paper Editing
• Technical Paper Editing
• Philosophy Editing
• PhD Dissertation Proofreading
• Lektorat Englisch
• Akademisches Lektorat
• Lektorat Englisch Preise
• Wissenschaftliches Lektorat
• Lektorat Doktorarbeit

PhD Thesis Editing

• Thesis Proofreading Services
• PhD Thesis Proofreading
• Proofreading Thesis Cost
• Proofreading Thesis
• Thesis Editing Services
• Professional Thesis Editing
• Thesis Editing Cost
• Proofreading Dissertation
• Dissertation Proofreading Cost
• Dissertation Proofreader
• Correção de Artigos Científicos
• Correção de Trabalhos Academicos
• Serviços de Correção de Inglês
• Correção de Dissertação
• Correção de Textos Precos
• 定額 ネイティブチェック
• Copy Editing
• FREE Courses
• Revision en Ingles
• Revision de Textos en Ingles
• Revision de Tesis
• Revision Medica en Ingles
• Revision de Tesis Precio
• Revisão de Artigos Científicos
• Revisão de Trabalhos Academicos
• Serviços de Revisão de Inglês
• Revisão de Dissertação
• Revisão de Textos Precos
• Corrección de Textos en Ingles
• Corrección de Tesis
• Corrección de Tesis Precio
• Corrección Medica en Ingles
• Corrector ingles

Select Page

How To Write the Findings Section of a Research Paper

Posted by Rene Tetzner | Sep 2, 2021 | Paper Writing Advice | 0 |

How To Write the Findings Section of a Research Paper Each research project is unique, so it is natural for one researcher to make use of somewhat different strategies than another when it comes to designing and writing the section of a research paper dedicated to findings. The academic or scientific discipline of the research, the field of specialisation, the particular author or authors, the targeted journal or other publisher and the editor making the decisions about publication can all have a significant impact. The practical steps outlined below can be effectively applied to writing about the findings of most advanced research, however, and will prove especially helpful for early-career scholars who are preparing a research paper for a first publication.

Step 1 : Consult the guidelines or instructions that the targeted journal (or other publisher) provides for authors and read research papers it has already published, particularly ones similar in topic, methods or results to your own. The guidelines will generally outline specific requirements for the results or findings section, and the published articles will provide sound examples of successful approaches. Watch particularly for length limitations and restrictions on content. Interpretation, for instance, is usually reserved for a later discussion section, though not always – qualitative research papers often combine findings and interpretation. Background information and descriptions of methods, on the other hand, almost always appear in earlier sections of a research paper. In most cases it is appropriate in a findings section to offer basic comparisons between the results of your study and those of other studies, but knowing exactly what the journal wants in the report of research findings is essential. Learning as much as you can about the journal’s aims and scope as well as the interests of its readers is invaluable as well.

Step 2 : Reflect at some length on your research results in relation to the journal’s requirements while planning the findings section of your paper. Choose for particular focus experimental results and other research discoveries that are particularly relevant to your research questions and objectives, and include them even if they are unexpected or do not support your ideas and hypotheses. Streamline and clarify your report, especially if it is long and complex, by using subheadings that will help you avoid excessive and peripheral details as you write and also help your reader understand and remember your findings. Consider appendices for raw data that might interest specialists but prove too long or distracting for other readers. The opening paragraph of a findings section often restates research questions or aims to refocus the reader’s attention, and it is always wise to summarise key findings at the end of the section, providing a smooth intellectual transition to the interpretation and discussion that follows in most research papers. There are many effective ways in which to organise research findings. The structure of your findings section might be determined by your research questions and hypotheses or match the arrangement of your methods section. A chronological order or hierarchy of importance or meaningful grouping of main themes or categories might prove effective. It may be best to present all the relevant findings and then explain them and your analysis of them, or explaining the results of each trial or test immediately after reporting it may render the material clearer and more comprehensible for your readers. Keep your audience, your most important evidence and your research goals in mind.

Step 3 : Design effective visual presentations of your research results to enhance the textual report of your findings. Tables of various styles and figures of all kinds such as graphs, maps and photos are used in reporting research findings, but do check the journal guidelines for instructions on the number of visual aids allowed, any required design elements and the preferred formats for numbering, labelling and placement in the manuscript. As a general rule, tables and figures should be numbered according to first mention in the main text of the paper, and each one should be clearly introduced and explained at least briefly in that text so that readers know what is presented and what they are expected to see in a particular visual element. Tables and figures should also be self-explanatory, however, so their design should include all definitions and other information necessary for a reader to understand the findings you intend to show without returning to your text. If you construct your tables and figures before drafting your findings section, they can serve as focal points to help you tell a clear and informative story about your findings and avoid unnecessary repetition. Some authors will even work on tables and figures before organising the findings section (Step 2), which can be an extremely effective approach, but it is important to remember that the textual report of findings remains primary. Visual aids can clarify and enrich the text, but they cannot take its place.

Step 4 : Write your findings section in a factual and objective manner. The goal is to communicate information – in some cases a great deal of complex information – as clearly, accurately and precisely as possible, so well-constructed sentences that maintain a simple structure will be far more effective than convoluted phrasing and expressions. The active voice is often recommended by publishers and the authors of writing manuals, and the past tense is appropriate because the research has already been done. Make sure your grammar, spelling and punctuation are correct and effective so that you are conveying the meaning you intend. Statements that are vague, imprecise or ambiguous will often confuse and mislead readers, and a verbose style will add little more than padding while wasting valuable words that might be put to far better use in clear and logical explanations. Some specialised terminology may be required when reporting findings, but anything potentially unclear or confusing that has not already been defined earlier in the paper should be clarified for readers, and the same principle applies to unusual or nonstandard abbreviations. Your readers will want to understand what you are reporting about your results, not waste time looking up terms simply to understand what you are saying. A logical approach to organising your findings section (Step 2) will help you tell a logical story about your research results as you explain, highlight, offer analysis and summarise the information necessary for readers to understand the discussion section that follows.

Step 5 : Review the draft of your findings section and edit and revise until it reports your key findings exactly as you would have them presented to your readers. Check for accuracy and consistency in data across the section as a whole and all its visual elements. Read your prose aloud to catch language errors, awkward phrases and abrupt transitions. Ensure that the order in which you have presented results is the best order for focussing readers on your research objectives and preparing them for the interpretations, speculations, recommendations and other elements of the discussion that you are planning. This will involve looking back over the paper’s introductory and background material as well as anticipating the discussion and conclusion sections, and this is precisely the right point in the process for reviewing and reflecting. Your research results have taken considerable time to obtain and analyse, so a little more time to stand back and take in the wider view from the research door you have opened is a wise investment. The opinions of any additional readers you can recruit, whether they are professional mentors and colleagues or family and friends, will often prove invaluable as well.

You might be interested in Services offered by Proof-Reading-Service.com

Journal editing.

Journal article editing services

PhD thesis editing services

Scientific Editing

Manuscript editing.

Manuscript editing services

Expert Editing

Expert editing for all papers

Research Editing

Research paper editing services

Professional book editing services

How To Write the Findings Section of a Research Paper These five steps will help you write a clear & interesting findings section for a research paper

Related Posts

How To Write a Journal Article

September 6, 2021

Tips on How To Write a Journal Article

August 30, 2021

How To Write Highlights for an Academic or Scientific Paper

September 7, 2021

Tips on How To Write an Effective Figure Legend

August 27, 2021

Our Recent Posts

Our review ratings

• Examples of Research Paper Topics in Different Study Areas Score: 98%
• Dealing with Language Problems – Journal Editor’s Feedback Score: 95%
• Making Good Use of a Professional Proofreader Score: 92%
• How To Format Your Journal Paper Using Published Articles Score: 95%
• Journal Rejection as Inspiration for a New Perspective Score: 95%

Explore our Categories

• Abbreviation in Academic Writing (4)
• Career Advice for Academics (5)
• Dealing with Paper Rejection (11)
• Grammar in Academic Writing (5)
• Help with Peer Review (7)
• How To Get Published (146)
• Paper Writing Advice (17)
• Referencing & Bibliographies (16)

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature
• Anthropology
• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies
• Cinema and Media Studies
• Communication
• Criminology
• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law
• International Relations
• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Reporting Research Findings

Introduction.

• Reference Resources
• History and Trends
• Guidance on Reporting Quantitative Reports, Syntheses, and Meta-analyses
• Linguistic Analyses of Written Research Results
• Writing Review Articles
• Writing Qualitative Research
• Scientific Reviewing
• Rhetoric of Evidence-Based Management
• Research on Graphics Perception
• Statistical-Technological Trends

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Ethics in Research
• Research Methods

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Corporate Globalization
• Organization Design
• Organizational Learning and Knowledge Transfer
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Reporting Research Findings by James T. Austin LAST REVIEWED: 27 May 2020 LAST MODIFIED: 24 June 2020 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199846740-0032

Not all research culminates in publication. This updated article surveys themes in reporting research findings for scholars and students. As context, consider that investigations of organizational phenomena require a series of choices that are cast here as craft. Choices span primary, secondary, and synthesis designs across qualitative and quantitative traditions. Primary research is the traditional design, measurement, and analysis of collected data, while secondary research involves reanalysis of existing data sets (obtained from peers or repositories), and research synthesis involves narrative or quantitative aggregation of studies. This distinction also holds for the qualitative mode. Reporting research findings is important for dissemination and for synthesis and evidence-based management (EBM). Primarily, the importance lies in dissemination across conferences, journals, books, and increasingly digital media. Understanding and replication by outside scholars depend on complete and accurate reporting; this centrality to the research craft commands a learning-development focus. Within a communications paradigm, individuals or teams create or send a persuasive message and the reader or listener receives (or may choose not to receive) the message. Persuasion is targeted via rhetoric across writing and graphics. Although oral and written forms of dissemination dominate, data repositories are emerging. Two additional reasons for importance pertain to the accumulation of knowledge. One is research synthesis. Structuring knowledge through synthesis uses the results of individual studies as data, and the audience is scientists. Narrative and quantitative reviews depend on the completeness and accuracy of reported findings. A related source of importance pertains to evidence-based management at the interface of research and practice—translation of research findings into practices and bundles of practices that can be used by managers. Given that practicing managers appear to rely on obsolete knowledge (aka “fads, fashions, and folderol” as used by Dunnette), proponents of evidence-based management advocate that firms consider the adoption of evidence-based medicine (EBM). Communicating clearly and establishing a context of implementation to assist practitioners are essential for EBM (in parallel to research synthesis, for an audience of practitioners). This article organizes a range of resources on writing and reviewing articles across the taxonomy above. For completeness, this article includes citations for scientific graphics (tables, charts, figures, etc.) organized around conceptualizations of graphics and related guidance, research on perception of scientific graphics, and recent developments in computing technology. Especially relevant are software routines for interactive graphics based on “grammars.” While this article draws on work in management studies (organizational behavior and human resources), it necessarily searches beyond traditional boundaries for relevant insights.

There are sporadic specialized sources on reporting of research findings. On scholarly writing, Cummings and Frost 1995 is an influential analysis of the publishing system in the organizational sciences. Abelson 1995 defines rhetoric as styles of writing up results in psychology. Research synthesis writing is addressed comprehensively in Cooper, et al. 2009 (cited under Guidance on Reporting Quantitative Reports, Syntheses, and Meta-analyses ). There are two major standards available for research synthesis: Meta-Analysis Reporting Standards (MARS) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses ( PRISMA ).For graphics and quantitative studies, Tufte 2001 and Tukey 1977 are classics for guidance and perspective; others, including Cleveland 1985 , Kosslyn 2006 , Wainer 2000 (cited under History and Trends ), and Wilkinson 2005 , provide unique value. The work on maps in Börner 2015 is aptly named Atlas of Knowledge , while Grant 2019 provides a concise introduction to data visualization with a section on interactive graphics (a related instance is the class of data explorers used for large data sets as the Programme for International Student Assessment [PISA] and the National Assessment of Educational Progress [NAEP]—both large-scale testing programs). Sternberg and Sternberg 2010 is typical guidance offered to students and is not the only such resource. Many of these texts can be mined for dimensions to code the content and results of published organizational behavior and human resources research to facilitate critique A trio of books by Katy Börner ( Börner 2010 , Börner 2015 ) and colleagues ( Börner and Polley 2014 ) represents the newest in knowledge mapping. In addition, a rapidly emerging topic across science is the reproducibility and replicability of results—the consensus review published in 2019 by a committee of the National Academies of Science, Medicine, and Engineering provides an excellent overview.

Abelson, Robert P. Statistics as Principled Argument . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1995.

Describes magnitude-articulation-generality-interestingness-credibility (MAGIC) criteria to organize rhetoric in presenting research findings. Accepting statistics as an organizer of arguments using quantitative evidence allows identification of styles. Brash and stuffy are end points on a liberal-conservative style dimension. Management students and scholars could learn MAGIC for reporting quantitative findings; qualitative researchers might consider translation.

Börner, Katy. Atlas of Science: Visualizing What We Know . Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 2010.

Books by Katy Börner show the potential and the practice of science and knowledge mapping. Atlas of Science (2010) presents three themes: power of maps (switching from geographic cartography to research-collaboration mapping), reference systems, and forecasts, as well as numerous examples.

Börner, Katy. Atlas of Knowledge: Anyone Can Map . Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 2015.

Börner deftly gives readers principles for visualizing knowledge with more than forty large-scale and over a hundred small-scale color maps. Drives home the point that data literacy is as important as language literacy. She introduces a theoretical framework meant to guide readers through user and task analysis; data preparation, analysis, and visualization; visualization deployment; and the interpretation of science maps. Together with Börner 2010 and Börner and Polley 2014 , this trio provides levels of analysis from frameworks to workflow that support improved visualizations of science, knowledge, and interdisciplinary collaboration.

Börner, Katy, and David E. Polley. Visual Insights: A Practical Guide to Making Sense of Data . Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 2014.

Along with Börner 2010 and Börner 2015 , a practical book by Börner and Polley based on the Information Visualization MOOC includes seven chapters—from a visualization framework through “when, where, what, and with whom” and dynamic visualizations—and concludes with chapters on case studies and discussion/outlook.

Cleveland, William S. The Elements of Graphing Data . Monterey, CA: Wadsworth Advanced Books and Software, 1985.

Cognitive science and statistical principles help dissect and improve graphics (a predecessor book from 1983 and articles that searched prestigious journals for common graphic errors are also useful). Based on extensive experience with AT&T data, the author distills and emphasizes procedural knowledge for constructing graphic displays.

Cummings, Larry L., and Peter J. Frost, eds. Publishing in the Organizational Sciences . 2d ed. Foundations of Organizational Science. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 1995.

This classic covers most aspects of publishing in organizational behavior and human resources (absent are emergent digital-technological issues). Organized into sections on perspectives on and realities of publishing, which are insightful for scholar and student alike. Benjamin Schneider’s ten propositions on “getting research published” end with practicing the skill of writing. This edition inaugurated the Foundations of Organizational Science series, and the 1985 edition is also useful.

Few, Stephen. Now You See It: Simple Visualization Techniques for Quantitative Analysis . Oakland, CA: Analytics, 2009.

Suggests that in a data-dense world, the human brain—and hence, visualization—is key to avoiding overload. Three sections, namely “Building Core Skills for Visual Analysis” and “Honing Skills,” each with six chapters plus a “Further Thoughts and Hopes” with eight promising trends, cover much ground. Based on quantitative preferences, the most substantive portion is contained in Part 2. The book ends with an excerpt from the poetry of T. S. Eliot.

Grant, Robert. Data Visualization: Charts, Maps and Interactive Graphics . Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2019.

This author provides a vast range of examples of data visualization, mostly open source and with code available on a website . It provides a good mix of detail with sharing of tacit knowledge.

Kosslyn, Stephen M. Graph Design for the Eye and Mind . New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195311846.001.0001

Based on sound cognitive science and ample research by the author, presents and elaborates eight principles of effective graph construction (summarized in pp. 5–20). Analyzes prominent guidance on graphics, Edward R. Tufte for example, and suggests flaws. that could lead to productive research.

Sternberg, Robert J., and Karin Sternberg The Psychologist’s Companion: A Guide to Writing Scientific Papers for Students and Researchers . 5th ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511762024

Aligned to American Psychological Association (APA) style as a prototype of good practice in publishing; the author is a productive researcher and APA journal editor; thus tacit knowledge in this edition is well grounded and expressed. Represents a class of books on research communication. Some translation required to organizational behavior and human resources context. Comparable to Cooper 2010 (cited under Writing Review Articles ). Next edition will need to conform to the seventh edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association .

Tufte, Edward R. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information . 2d ed. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press, 2001.

Revises a classic 1983 text in analytic design (Tufte’s preferred term); presents and expands on five core principles and coins numerous terms (“chartjunk” as well as “sparkline” and “data-ink ratios” are personal favorites). Critiqued for its advice, however, by other researchers on graphics ( Kosslyn 2006 ).

Tukey, John W. Exploratory Data Analysis . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1977.

A classic presenting Tukey’s data detective work rooted in his 1962 “The Future of Data Analysis” exposition ( Annals of Mathematical Statistics 33.1: 1–67). Premise is that exploratory data analysis (EDA) deserves status with confirmatory. Loaded with philosophy of EDA and tools—the stem leaf, box plot, and “five-number summary.” Graphic display and analysis are covered in the service of learning about data. A part of research craft to be honed post-schooling.

Wilkinson, Leland L. The Grammar of Graphics . 2d ed. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2005.

Cited by many, this conceptualization rooted in the work of Jacques Bertin extends work done with the Task Force on Statistical Reporting in 1999. Within an object-oriented design approach, the grammar consists of the rules and elements of graphics, for example, geoms, scales, and coordinates. Framework has been useful for deriving tools, such as Wilkinson’s GPL, Wickham’s ggplot2, and others.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About Management »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Abusive Supervision
• Adverse Impact and Equal Employment Opportunity Analytics
• Alliance Portfolios
• Alternative Work Arrangements
• Applied Political Risk Analysis
• Approaches to Social Responsibility
• Assessment Centers: Theory, Practice and Research
• Attributions
• Authentic Leadership
• Bayesian Statistics
• Behavior, Organizational
• Behavioral Approach to Leadership
• Behavioral Theory of the Firm
• Between Organizations, Social Networks in and
• Brokerage in Networks
• Business and Human Rights
• Career Studies
• Career Transitions and Job Mobility
• Certified B Corporations and Benefit Corporations
• Charismatic and Innovative Team Leadership By and For Mill...
• Charismatic and Transformational Leadership
• Compensation, Rewards, Remuneration
• Competitive Dynamics
• Competitive Heterogeneity
• Competitive Intensity
• Computational Modeling
• Conditional Reasoning
• Conflict Management
• Considerate Leadership
• Corporate Philanthropy
• Corporate Social Performance
• Corporate Venture Capital
• Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB)
• Cross-Cultural Communication
• Cross-Cultural Management
• Cultural Intelligence
• Culture, Organization
• Data Analytic Methods
• Decision Making
• Dynamic Capabilities
• Emotional Labor
• Employee Aging
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Ownership
• Employee Voice
• Empowerment, Psychological
• Entrepreneurial Firms
• Entrepreneurial Orientation
• Entrepreneurship
• Entrepreneurship, Corporate
• Entrepreneurship, Women’s
• Equal Employment Opportunity
• Faking in Personnel Selection
• Family Business, Managing
• Financial Markets in Organization Theory and Economic Soci...
• Findings, Reporting Research
• Firm Bribery
• First-Mover Advantage
• Fit, Person-Environment
• Forecasting
• Founding Teams
• Global Leadership
• Global Talent Management
• Goal Setting
• Grounded Theory
• Hofstedes Cultural Dimensions
• Human Capital Resource Pipelines
• Human Resource Management
• Human Resource Management, Strategic
• Human Resources, Global
• Human Rights
• Humanitarian Work Psychology
• Humility in Management
• Impression Management at Work
• Influence Strategies/Tactics in the Workplace
• Information Economics
• Innovative Behavior
• Intelligence, Emotional
• International Economic Development and SMEs
• International Economic Systems
• International Strategic Alliances
• Job Analysis and Competency Modeling
• Job Crafting
• Job Satisfaction
• Judgment and Decision Making in Teams
• Knowledge Sharing and Collaboration within and across Firm...
• Leader-Member Exchange
• Leadership Development
• Leadership Development and Organizational Change, Coaching...
• Leadership, Ethical
• Leadership, Global and Comparative
• Leadership, Strategic
• Learning by Doing in Organizational Activities
• Management History
• Management In Antiquity
• Managerial and Organizational Cognition
• Managerial Discretion
• Meaningful Work
• Multinational Corporations and Emerging Markets
• Neo-institutional Theory
• Neuroscience, Organizational
• New Ventures
• Organization Design, Global
• Organization Development and Change
• Organization Research, Ethnography in
• Organization Theory
• Organizational Adaptation
• Organizational Ambidexterity
• Organizational Behavior, Emotions in
• Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCBs)
• Organizational Climate
• Organizational Control
• Organizational Corruption
• Organizational Hybridity
• Organizational Identity
• Organizational Justice
• Organizational Legitimacy
• Organizational Networks
• Organizational Paradox
• Organizational Performance, Personality Theory and
• Organizational Responsibility
• Organizational Surveys, Driving Change Through
• Organizations, Big Data in
• Organizations, Gender in
• Organizations, Identity Work in
• Organizations, Political Ideology in
• Organizations, Social Identity Processes in
• Overqualification
• Paternalistic Leadership
• Pay for Skills, Knowledge, and Competencies
• People Analytics
• Performance Appraisal
• Performance Feedback Theory
• Planning And Goal Setting
• Proactive Work Behavior
• Psychological Contracts
• Psychological Safety
• Real Options Theory
• Recruitment
• Regional Entrepreneurship
• Reputation, Organizational Image and
• Research, Ethics in
• Research, Longitudinal
• Research Methods, Qualitative
• Resource Redeployment
• Resource-Dependence Theory
• Response Surface Analysis, Polynomial Regression and
• Role of Time in Organizational Studies
• Safety, Work Place
• Selection, Applicant Reactions to
• Self-Determination Theory for Work Motivation
• Self-Efficacy
• Self-Fulfilling Prophecy In Management
• Self-Management and Personal Agency
• Sensemaking in and around Organizations
• Service Management
• Shared Team Leadership
• Social Cognitive Theory
• Social Evaluation: Status and Reputation
• Social Movement Theory
• Social Ties and Network Structure
• Socialization
• Sports Settings in Management Research
• Stakeholders
• Status in Organizations
• Strategic Alliances
• Strategic Human Capital
• Strategy and Cognition
• Strategy Implementation
• Structural Contingency Theory/Information Processing Theor...
• Team Composition
• Team Conflict
• Team Design Characteristics
• Team Learning
• Team Mental Models
• Team Newcomers
• Team Performance
• Team Processes
• Teams, Global
• Technology and Innovation Management
• Technology, Organizational Assessment and
• the Workplace, Millennials in
• Theory X and Theory Y
• Time and Motion Studies
• Training and Development
• Training Evaluation
• Trust in Organizational Contexts
• Unobtrusive Measures
• Virtual Teams
• Whistle-Blowing
• Work and Family: An Organizational Science Overview
• Work Contexts, Nonverbal Communication in
• Work, Mindfulness at
• Workplace Aggression and Violence
• Workplace Coaching
• Workplace Commitment
• Workplace Gossip
• Workplace Meetings
• Workplace, Spiritual Leadership in the
• World War II, Management Research during
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [66.249.64.20|109.248.223.228]
• 109.248.223.228

Accessibility Settings

Color options, reading tools.

How to Report on Scientific Findings

Read this article in.

• বাংলা ( Bengali )

Related Resources

GIJN Updates Its Reporting Guide for Investigating Sexual Abuse

10 Investigative Questions to Ask after a Natural Disaster

GIJN Bookshelf: Investigative Titles for Your 2022 Reading List

Lessons Learned from Investigating Misinformation Around the World

Image: Shutterstock

When news outlets report that new research studies prove something, they’re almost certainly wrong.

Studies conducted in fields outside of mathematics do not “prove” anything. They find evidence — sometimes, extraordinarily strong evidence.

It’s important journalists understand that science is an ongoing process of collecting and interrogating evidence, with each new discovery building on or raising questions about earlier discoveries. A single research study usually represents one small step toward fully understanding an issue or problem.

Even when scientists have lots of very strong evidence, they rarely claim to have found proof because proof is absolute. To prove something means there is no chance another explanation exists.

“Even a modest familiarity with the history of science offers many examples of matters that scientists thought they had resolved, only to discover that they needed to be reconsidered,”  Naomi Oreskes , a professor of the history of science at Harvard University, writes in  a July 2021 essay  in Scientific American. “Some familiar examples are Earth as the center of the universe, the absolute nature of time and space, the stability of continents, and the cause of infectious disease.”

Oreskes points out in her 2004 paper “ Science and Public Policy: What’s Proof Got To Do With It? ” that “proof — at least in an absolute sense — is a theoretical ideal, available in geometry class but not in real life.”

Math scholars routinely rely on logic to try to prove something beyond any doubt. What sets mathematicians apart from other scientists is their use of mathematical proofs, a step-by-step argument written using words, symbols, and diagrams to convince another mathematician that a given statement is true, explains Steven G. Krantz , a professor of mathematics and statistics at Washington University in St. Louis.

“It is proof that is our device for establishing the absolute and irrevocable truth of statements in our subject,” he writes in The History and Concept of Mathematical Proof . “This is the reason that we can depend on mathematics that was done by Euclid 2300 years ago as readily as we believe in the mathematics that is done today. No other discipline can make such an assertion.”

If you’re still unsure how to describe the conclusiveness of research findings, keep reading. These four tips will help you get it right.

1. Avoid reporting that a research study or group of studies “proves” something — even if a press release says so.

Press releases announcing new research often exaggerate or minimize findings,  academic studies have found . Some mistakenly state that researchers have proven something they haven’t.

The  KSJ Science Editing Handbook  urges journalists to read press releases carefully. The handbook, a project of the  Knight Science Journalism Fellowship at MIT , features guidance and insights from some of the world’s most talented science writers and editors.

“Press releases that are unaccompanied by journal publications rarely offer any data and, by definition, offer a biased view of the findings’ value,” according to the handbook, which also warns journalists to “never presume that everything in them is accurate or complete.”

Any claim that researchers in any field outside mathematics have proven something should raise a red flag for journalists, says  Barbara Gastel , a professor of integrative biosciences, humanities in medicine, and biotechnology at Texas A&M University.

She says journalists need to evaluate the research themselves.

“Read the full paper,” says Gastel, who’s also director of Texas A&M’s  master’s degree program in science and technology journalism . “Don’t go only on the news release. Don’t go only on the abstract to get a full sense of how strong the evidence is. Read the full paper and be ready to ask some questions — sometimes, hard questions — of the researchers.”

2. Use language that correctly conveys the strength of the evidence that a research study or group of studies provides.

Researchers investigate an issue or problem to better understand it and build on what earlier research has found. While studies usually unearth new information, it’s seldom enough to reach definitive conclusions.

When reporting on a study or group of studies, journalists should choose words that accurately convey the level of confidence researchers have in the findings, says  Glenn Branch , deputy director of the nonprofit  National Center for Science Education , which studies how public schools, museums, and other organizations communicate about science.

For example, don’t say a study “establishes” certain facts or “settles” a longstanding question when it simply “suggests” something is true or “offers clues” about some aspect of the subject being examined.

Branch urges journalists to pay close attention to the language researchers use in academic articles. Scientists typically express themselves in degrees of confidence, he notes. He suggests journalists check out the guidance on communicating levels of certainty across disciplines offered by the  Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , created by the United Nations and World Meteorological Organization to help governments understand, adapt to, and mitigate the impacts of climate change.

“The IPCC guidance is probably the most well-developed system for consistently reporting the degree of confidence in scientific results, so it, or something like it, may start to become the gold standard,” Branch wrote via email.

Gastel says it is important journalists know that even though research in fields outside mathematics do not prove anything, a group of studies, together, can provide evidence so strong it gets close to proof.

It can provide “overwhelming evidence, particularly if there are multiple well-designed studies that point in the same direction,” she says.

To convey very high levels of confidence, journalists can use phrases such as “researchers are all but certain” and “researchers have as much confidence as possible in this area of inquiry.”

Another way to gauge levels of certainty: Find out whether scholars have reached a  scientific consensus , or a collective position based on their interpretation of the evidence.

Independent scientific organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, and American Medical Association issue consensus statements on various topics, typically to communicate either scientific consensus or the collective opinion of a convened panel of subject experts.

3. When reporting on a single study, explain what it contributes to the body of knowledge on that given topic and whether the evidence, as a whole, leans in a certain direction. 

Many people are unfamiliar with the scientific process, so they need journalists’ help understanding how a single research study fits into the larger landscape of scholarship on an issue or problem. Tell audiences what, if anything, researchers can say about the issue or problem with a high level of certainty after considering all the evidence, together.

A great resource for journalists trying to put a study into context: editorials published in academic journals. Some journals, including the  New England Journal of Medicine  and  JAMA , the journal of the American Medical Association, sometimes publish an editorial about a new paper along with the paper, Gastel notes.

Editorials, typically written by one or more scholars who were not involved in the study but have deep expertise in the field, can help journalists gauge the importance of a paper and its contributions.

“I find that is really handy,” Gastel adds.

4. Review headlines closely before they are published. And  read our tip sheet  on avoiding mistakes in headlines about health and medical research.

Editors, especially those who are not familiar with the process of scientific inquiry, can easily make mistakes when writing or changing headlines about research. And a bad headline can derail a reporter’s best efforts to cover research accurately.

To prevent errors, Gastel recommends reporters submit suggested headlines with their stories. She also recommends they review their story’s headline right before it is published.

Another good idea: Editors, including copy editors, could make a habit of consulting with reporters on news headlines about research, science, and other technical topics. Together, they can choose the most accurate language and decide whether to ever use the word “prove.”

Gastel and Branch agree that editors would benefit from science journalism training, particularly as it relates to reporting on health and medicine. Headlines making erroneous claims about the effectiveness of certain drugs and treatments can harm the public. So can headlines claiming researchers have “proven” what causes or prevents health conditions such as cancer, dementia, and schizophrenia.

Our  tip sheet on headline writing  addresses this and other issues.

“‘Prove’ is a short, snappy word, so it works in a headline — but it’s usually wrong,” says Branch. “Headline writers need to be as aware of this as the journalists are.”

This post was originally published by The Journalist’s Resource and is reprinted here under a Creative Commons license. 

Additional Resources

The Rise of Science-Based Investigative Journalism

Meet the Watchdog Scientists Battling Dubious Scientific Research

4 Tips for Avoiding Math Errors When Reporting

Related Stories

Spotting Deepfakes in an Election Year: How AI Detection Tools Work — and Sometimes Fail

How Tech Platforms Are Suffocating Watchdog Journalism in Russia and Around the World

Unlocking the Secrets of Algorithms: Q & A with Investigative Data Journalist Leon Yin

ARIJ16 Showcases Cross-Border Collaboration and Award-Winning Journalism

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

Read other stories tagged with:

Republish this article, news & analysis.

This Reuters Institute story offers preliminary insights on how to evaluate and understand the outcomes provided by publicly accessible AI detectors that are available for free or at low cost.

Publications like Russia’s The Insider have found their investigative reporting caught between state censorship and hostile online platform dynamics.

Data Journalism Methodology

The investigative data journalist touches on his work interrogating social media algorithms and how reporters can determine what is a worthwhile story to pursue.

Awards, Grants, & Fellowships News & Analysis

ARIJ’s 16th annual forum in Amman, Jordan highlighted “cross-border collaboration in a fragmented world” and recognized numerous regional stories with awards.

How to Write Effective Research Reports

Frankline kibuacha | dec. 02, 2022 | 3 min. read.

A research report is a document that summarizes and provides an analysis of the findings of a research project. It is an important document that serves as a first-hand account of the research process, data, and findings of a research study, and it is typically considered an objective and accurate source of information.

There are a few questions a research report should answer:

• What are you researching?
• What is the goal of your research?
• What are your methods for researching?
• What did you find in your research?
• How does this compare to other findings?
• And what is the impact of this finding on the world?

A research report is normally organized into three broad sections. First, an introduction provides a brief background on the topic and introduces the reader to your perspective. The second section is the body of the report, which should include the research findings and supporting evidence. Finally, the conclusion, which summarizes your arguments and the implications of your study for future research.

Every year, GeoPoll carries out hundreds of research studies and produces reports on several topics, both for clients and internally commissioned studies. In this article, we highlight some tips for writing great reports from our experience.

Tips for writing excellent research reports

• Start from the basics – with an outline – It is a good idea to outline the research context and findings before taking the plunge, as it helps with the flow and structure of the research report. Once you have the broader information well documented, filling the gaps with the content and findings becomes more straightforward and sets the tone for the report.
• Consider the target audience – To guide the report, always keep the target audience in mind and then select a format that is clear, logical and obvious to the audience. A report meant for top decision-makers, for example, could be more concise than one meant for other researchers. Writing for the audience ensures that the research findings help the cause, so consider writing in their language to make it easy to understand at their level.
• Answer the research questions – Every effective research starts with a clear objective. In writing the report, make sure that the data provided contribute to the goal, which is, in reality, the real purpose for conducting the research in the first place.
• Be simple and clear – Research reports need not be complicated. Aim to write the report with an accuracy of details and language that is simplest and clearest to the reader. Use clear titles that clearly describe the following section in a way that readers will want to get into.
• Provide the methodology implemented – Researchers should also include a summary of the methods used to conduct the research, which provides the overall approaches and perspectives of the research process. The methodology details aspects such as the research objectives, the sample used , broken down into demographics such as gender, location, age, and other sample characteristics, data collection modes used, and data analysis methods. Sharing your methodology gives legitimacy to your research.
• Choose graphs correctly – Research reports often feature graphs to bring out data clearly. To fulfill this purpose, the graphs you use in your report must be clear enough so that the readers understand them themselves. Use clear titles, try and include the original question, and choose the best chart types to represent the data.
• Remain relevant – Not everything is genuinely essential to a research report, and you should aim at prioritizing only the significant discoveries. The idea of a research report is to present an abridged yet impactful version of your research, and it’s OK to exclude irrelevant information while highlighting only essential data and findings.
• Grammar and spelling are imperative – Even more important than most writings, research reports need to be written following the best language practices to help to understand the report and not unconsciously water down the seriousness of the information. Read aloud while writing to put yourself in the shoes of the reader. Use grammar and spell-checking tools and engage other people to proofread the report to ensure it reads well for the target audience.
• Choose an impactful title – A good research report title is brief, precise, and provides a clear idea of the underlying research so that readers can grasp the entire focus of your research from the title.
• Shoot for a strong conclusion – The conclusion in the research reports is primarily important because it summarizes the information and recommendations, and often, some readers skim through to the conclusion. Make a precise summary, highlight the findings that stand out, and provide the implications or courses of action derived from the research findings.

Read Free GeoPoll Reports

GeoPoll conducts research worldwide on topics integral to the organizations we serve and the world. You can read and download our reports here for free. Sign up for our newsletter to receive GeoPoll reports as soon as we release them.

Contact us about your upcoming research project and learn how we can help.

Related Posts

How to Write and Design Effective Surveys

Who Owns the Media in Ghana; A Research Project

How to Run B2B Market Research Surveys

• Follow us on Facebook
• Follow us on Twitter
• Criminal Justice
• Environment
• Politics & Government
• Race & Gender

Expert Commentary

Don’t say ‘prove’: How to report on the conclusiveness of research findings

This tip sheet explains why it's rarely accurate for news stories to report that a new study proves anything — even when a press release says it does.

Republish this article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

by Denise-Marie Ordway, The Journalist's Resource February 13, 2023

This <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org/media/dont-say-prove-research-tip-sheet/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org">The Journalist's Resource</a> and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.<img src="https://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/cropped-jr-favicon-150x150.png" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

When news outlets report that new research studies prove something, they’re almost certainly wrong.

Studies conducted in fields outside of mathematics do not “prove” anything. They find evidence — sometimes, extraordinarily strong evidence.

It’s important journalists understand that science is an ongoing process of collecting and interrogating evidence, with each new discovery building on or raising questions about earlier discoveries. A single research study usually represents one small step toward fully understanding an issue or problem.

Even when scientists have lots of very strong evidence, they rarely claim to have found proof because proof is absolute. To prove something means there is no chance another explanation exists.

“Even a modest familiarity with the history of science offers many examples of matters that scientists thought they had resolved, only to discover that they needed to be reconsidered,” Naomi Oreskes , a professor of the history of science at Harvard University, writes in a July 2021 essay in Scientific American. “Some familiar examples are Earth as the center of the universe, the absolute nature of time and space, the stability of continents, and the cause of infectious disease.”

Oreskes points out in her 2004 paper “ Science and Public Policy: What’s Proof Got To Do With It? ” that “proof — at least in an absolute sense — is a theoretical ideal, available in geometry class but not in real life.”

Math scholars routinely rely on logic to try to prove something beyond any doubt. What sets mathematicians apart from other scientists is their use of mathematical proofs, a step-by-step argument written using words, symbols and diagrams to convince another mathematician that a given statement is true, explains Steven G. Krantz , a professor of mathematics and statistics at Washington University in St. Louis.

“It is proof that is our device for establishing the absolute and irrevocable truth of statements in our subject,” he writes in “ The History and Concept of Mathematical Proof .” “This is the reason that we can depend on mathematics that was done by Euclid 2300 years ago as readily as we believe in the mathematics that is done today. No other discipline can make such an assertion.”

If you’re still unsure how to describe the conclusiveness of research findings, keep reading. These four tips will help you get it right.

1. Avoid reporting that a research study or group of studies “proves” something — even if a press release says so.

Press releases announcing new research often exaggerate or minimize findings, academic studies have found . Some mistakenly state researchers have proven something they haven’t.

The KSJ Science Editing Handbook urges journalists to read press releases carefully. The handbook, a project of the Knight Science Journalism Fellowship at MIT , features guidance and insights from some of the world’s most talented science writers and editors.

“Press releases that are unaccompanied by journal publications rarely offer any data and, by definition, offer a biased view of the findings’ value,” according to the handbook, which also warns journalists to “never presume that everything in them is accurate or complete.”

Any claim that researchers in any field outside mathematics have proven something should raise a red flag for journalists, says Barbara Gastel , a professor of integrative biosciences, humanities in medicine, and biotechnology at Texas A&M University.

She says journalists need to evaluate the research themselves.

“Read the full paper,” says Gastel, who’s also director of Texas A&M University’s master’s degree program in science and technology journalism . “Don’t go only on the news release. Don’t go only on the abstract to get a full sense of how strong the evidence is. Read the full paper and be ready to ask some questions — sometimes, hard questions — of the researchers.”

2. Use language that correctly conveys the strength of the evidence that a research study or group of studies provides.

Researchers investigate an issue or problem to better understand it and build on what earlier research has found. While studies usually unearth new information, it’s seldom enough to reach definitive conclusions.

When reporting on a study or group of studies, journalists should choose words that accurately convey the level of confidence researchers have in the findings, says Glenn Branch , deputy director of the nonprofit National Center for Science Education , which studies how public schools, museums and other organizations communicate about science.

For example, don’t say a study “establishes” certain facts or “settles” a longstanding question when it simply “suggests” something is true or “offers clues” about some aspect of the subject being examined.

Branch urges journalists to pay close attention to the language researchers use in academic articles. Scientists typically express themselves in degrees of confidence, he notes. He suggests journalists check out the guidance on communicating levels of certainty across disciplines offered by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , created by the United Nations and World Meteorological Organization to help governments understand, adapt to and mitigate the impacts of climate change.

“The IPCC guidance is probably the most well-developed system for consistently reporting the degree of confidence in scientific results, so it, or something like it, may start to become the gold standard,” Branch wrote via email.

Gastel says it is important journalists know that even though research in fields outside mathematics do not prove anything, a group of studies, together, can provide evidence so strong it gets close to proof.

It can provide “overwhelming evidence, particularly if there are multiple well-designed studies that point in the same direction,” she says.

To convey very high levels of confidence, journalists can use phrases such as “researchers are all but certain” and “researchers have as much confidence as possible in this area of inquiry.”

Another way to gauge levels of certainty: Find out whether scholars have reached a scientific consensus ,  or a collective position based on their interpretation of the evidence.

Independent scientific organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science and American Medical Association issue consensus statements on various topics, typically to communicate either scientific consensus or the collective opinion of a convened panel of subject experts.

3. When reporting on a single study, explain what it contributes to the body of knowledge on that given topic and whether the evidence, as a whole, leans in a certain direction. 

Many people are unfamiliar with the scientific process, so they need journalists’ help understanding how a single research study fits into the larger landscape of scholarship on an issue or problem. Tell audiences what, if anything, researchers can say about the issue or problem with a high level of certainty after considering all the evidence, together.

A great resource for journalists trying to put a study into context: editorials published in academic journals. Some journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine and JAMA , the journal of the American Medical Association, sometimes publish an editorial about a new paper along with the paper, Gastel notes.

Editorials, typically written by one or more scholars who were not involved in the study but have deep expertise in the field, can help journalists gauge the importance of a paper and its contributions.

“I find that is really handy,” Gastel adds.

4. Review headlines closely before they are published. And read our tip sheet on avoiding mistakes in headlines about health and medical research.

Editors, especially those who are not familiar with the process of scientific inquiry, can easily make mistakes when writing or changing headlines about research. And a bad headline can derail a reporter’s best efforts to cover research accurately.

To prevent errors, Gastel recommends reporters submit suggested headlines with their stories. She also recommends they review their story’s headline right before it is published.

Another good idea: Editors, including copy editors, could make a habit of consulting with reporters on news headlines about research, science and other technical topics. Together, they can choose the most accurate language and decide whether to ever use the word ‘prove.’

Gastel and Branch agree that editors would benefit from science journalism training, particularly as it relates to reporting on health and medicine. Headlines making erroneous claims about the effectiveness of certain drugs and treatments can harm the public. So can headlines claiming researchers have “proven” what causes or prevents health conditions such as cancer, dementia and schizophrenia.

Our tip sheet on headline writing addresses this and other issues.

“’Prove’ is a short, snappy word, so it works in a headline — but it’s usually wrong,” says Branch. “Headline writers need to be as aware of this as the journalists are.”

About The Author

Denise-Marie Ordway

AI Index: State of AI in 13 Charts

In the new report, foundation models dominate, benchmarks fall, prices skyrocket, and on the global stage, the U.S. overshadows.

This year’s AI Index — a 500-page report tracking 2023’s worldwide trends in AI — is out.

The index is an independent initiative at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI), led by the AI Index Steering Committee, an interdisciplinary group of experts from across academia and industry. This year’s report covers the rise of multimodal foundation models, major cash investments into generative AI, new performance benchmarks, shifting global opinions, and new major regulations.

Don’t have an afternoon to pore through the findings? Check out the high level here.

A Move Toward Open-Sourced

This past year, organizations released 149 foundation models, more than double the number released in 2022. Of these newly released models, 65.7% were open-source (meaning they can be freely used and modified by anyone), compared with only 44.4% in 2022 and 33.3% in 2021.

But At a Cost of Performance?

Closed-source models still outperform their open-sourced counterparts. On 10 selected benchmarks, closed models achieved a median performance advantage of 24.2%, with differences ranging from as little as 4.0% on mathematical tasks like GSM8K to as much as 317.7% on agentic tasks like AgentBench.

Biggest Players

Industry dominates AI, especially in building and releasing foundation models. This past year Google edged out other industry players in releasing the most models, including Gemini and RT-2. In fact, since 2019, Google has led in releasing the most foundation models, with a total of 40, followed by OpenAI with 20. Academia trails industry: This past year, UC Berkeley released three models and Stanford two.

Industry Dwarfs All

If you needed more striking evidence that corporate AI is the only player in the room right now, this should do it. In 2023, industry accounted for 72% of all new foundation models.

Prices Skyrocket

One of the reasons academia and government have been edged out of the AI race: the exponential increase in cost of training these giant models. Google’s Gemini Ultra cost an estimated $191 million worth of compute to train, while OpenAI’s GPT-4 cost an estimated $78 million. In comparison, in 2017, the original Transformer model, which introduced the architecture that underpins virtually every modern LLM, cost around $900.

What AI Race?

At least in terms of notable machine learning models, the United States vastly outpaced other countries in 2023, developing a total of 61 models in 2023. Since 2019, the U.S. has consistently led in originating the majority of notable models, followed by China and the UK.

Move Over, Human

As of 2023, AI has hit human-level performance on many significant AI benchmarks, from those testing reading comprehension to visual reasoning. Still, it falls just short on some benchmarks like competition-level math. Because AI has been blasting past so many standard benchmarks, AI scholars have had to create new and more difficult challenges. This year’s index also tracked several of these new benchmarks, including those for tasks in coding, advanced reasoning, and agentic behavior.

Private Investment Drops (But We See You, GenAI)

While AI private investment has steadily dropped since 2021, generative AI is gaining steam. In 2023, the sector attracted $25.2 billion, nearly ninefold the investment of 2022 and about 30 times the amount from 2019 (call it the ChatGPT effect). Generative AI accounted for over a quarter of all AI-related private investments in 2023.

U.S. Wins $$ Race

And again, in 2023 the United States dominates in AI private investment. In 2023, the $67.2 billion invested in the U.S. was roughly 8.7 times greater than the amount invested in the next highest country, China, and 17.8 times the amount invested in the United Kingdom. That lineup looks the same when zooming out: Cumulatively since 2013, the United States leads investments at $335.2 billion, followed by China with $103.7 billion, and the United Kingdom at $22.3 billion.

Where is Corporate Adoption?

More companies are implementing AI in some part of their business: In surveys, 55% of organizations said they were using AI in 2023, up from 50% in 2022 and 20% in 2017. Businesses report using AI to automate contact centers, personalize content, and acquire new customers. 

Younger and Wealthier People Worry About Jobs

Globally, most people expect AI to change their jobs, and more than a third expect AI to replace them. Younger generations — Gen Z and millennials — anticipate more substantial effects from AI compared with older generations like Gen X and baby boomers. Specifically, 66% of Gen Z compared with 46% of boomer respondents believe AI will significantly affect their current jobs. Meanwhile, individuals with higher incomes, more education, and decision-making roles foresee AI having a great impact on their employment.

While the Commonwealth Worries About AI Products

When asked in a survey about whether AI products and services make you nervous, 69% of Aussies and 65% of Brits said yes. Japan is the least worried about their AI products at 23%.  

Regulation Rallies

More American regulatory agencies are passing regulations to protect citizens and govern the use of AI tools and data. For example, the Copyright Office and the Library of Congress passed copyright registration guidance concerning works that contained material generated by AI, while the Securities and Exchange Commission developed a cybersecurity risk management strategy, governance, and incident disclosure plan. The agencies to pass the most regulation were the Executive Office of the President and the Commerce Department. 

The AI Index was first created to track AI development. The index collaborates with such organizations as LinkedIn, Quid, McKinsey, Studyportals, the Schwartz Reisman Institute, and the International Federation of Robotics to gather the most current research and feature important insights on the AI ecosystem. 

More News Topics

• About the Hub
• Announcements
• Faculty Experts Guide
• Subscribe to the newsletter

Explore by Topic

• Arts+Culture
• Politics+Society
• Science+Technology
• Student Life
• University News
• Voices+Opinion
• About Hub at Work
• Gazette Archive
• Benefits+Perks
• Health+Well-Being
• Current Issue
• About the Magazine
• Past Issues
• Support Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Subscribe to the Magazine

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Credit: PALESTINIAN NEWS & INFORMATION AGENCY (WAFA) IN CONTRACT WITH APAIMAGES, CC BY-SA 3.0

International team including Johns Hopkins experts makes excess deaths projections in Gaza

Johns hopkins civil and systems engineering professor tak igusa explains how the research team modeled projections of future casualties from trauma, infectious diseases, and other factors in gaza.

By Lisa Ercolano

If fighting continues at a similar pace through August, the conflict in Gaza could cause between 58,260 and 66,720 excess deaths from military action, disease, malnutrition, poor sanitation, a lack of medical care, and more, according to a report issued in February by an international team of experts including researchers from Johns Hopkins University. Excess deaths refer to the number exceeding what would be expected based on Gaza data from the recent past (baseline deaths). If the conflict escalates, the projected toll could reach between 74,290 and 85,750 excess deaths.

The recent report, "Crisis in Gaza: Scenario-Based Health Impact Projections," funded by the UK Humanitarian Innovation Hub and led by Francesco Checchi from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Paul Spiegel , director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Humanitarian Health , provides projections with the goal of informing critical decision-making and policy related to humanitarian efforts in the region.

Image caption: Tak Igusa

Image credit : Will Kirk / Johns Hopkins University

The Hub recently spoke with research team member Tak Igusa , a systems expert and a professor in the Department of Civil and Systems Engineering at JHU's Whiting School of Engineering and a member of the Center for Systems Science and Engineering. Igusa is leading the modeling for trauma-related fatalities and supervises projections for communicable diseases.

What did the team learn from its first report? Did your analysis reveal any unexpected insights?

In my previous modeling work on natural disasters, I examined the impacts of the reduction of essential services and supplies. These models include the emergency response that would typically be brought in to help communities recover. Our Gaza report analyzed what would happen if such assistance was unavailable due to the conflict. We projected multiple health impacts, including non-communicable and infectious diseases, malnutrition, and maternal and newborn mortality. One of our findings is that there is a steadily increasing possibility of cholera, famine, and other humanitarian disasters that may result in higher mortality than the trauma deaths from the conflict. 


How do you model excess mortality rates in Gaza? What data sources do you rely on and how do you address potential data gaps or biases?

Our academic team encompassed a wide range of disciplines including epidemiology, disaster response, nutrition, and maternal and neonatal health. We also used panels of experts to provide estimates for various risk factors, such as the rate of mortality for various types of trauma, and the reproductive number for cholera and other infectious diseases. We used experts who were familiar with or had worked in conflict zones.

I am glad you asked about bias. We discussed the importance of producing an unbiased report in nearly every team meeting. There are some specific steps we took to remove possible sources of bias. First, we carefully looked for possible sources of bias in our data, which came from the academic literature or publicly available sources from the current or past conflicts in the Gaza Strip or other similar settings in the Middle East. Second, we made our data and methods, including the computation code, easily accessible on GitHub to demonstrate transparency and to allow others to reproduce and check our results.


How does your model account for compounding risk factors? For example, how might damage to infrastructure exacerbate the risk of death from food insecurity and lack of access to health care? 


As a systems modeler, I have been working with the team on the interactions between risk factors. We needed more time to complete this complex analysis for our February report, and are currently working on the broad health impacts of sustained malnutrition.


What additional data points could be incorporated into future studies to provide an even more comprehensive understanding of the situation and shed light on where resources are needed most? 


You are correct in noting that complete data is essential for assessing the humanitarian situation. The example I am thinking about now is food. We modelers can compute the total nutritional needs of the Gaza population, and we can also calculate the number of calories entering the Gaza Strip through emergency relief efforts. We also know that it is not possible to distribute these calories evenly and that there is a severe deficit in various regions of Gaza. The additional data we need in this example is related to the flow—or lack thereof—of food to the regions of the Gaza Strip with the most severe cases of malnutrition.


What is the goal or intended impact of making these reports publicly available? While the data itself may be neutral, there was initially some concern that releasing it could elicit strong feelings from various parties. Has that been your experience? 


The U.K. Humanitarian Innovation Hub funded our project to assess the wide health impacts of the conflict in Gaza. Our February report assessed this impact by comparing mortalities due to continuing or escalating conflicts with mortalities in a ceasefire scenario. We presented our numerical findings, pointed out the need for a multi-faceted health response, and highlighted the lifesaving impact an immediate ceasefire would have.



We got quite positive and, in many cases, respectful responses. This may be partly because our report is a comprehensive examination of the impacts of the conflict in Gaza conducted by a team of academics.


Are your research findings currently being used to inform decision-making about resource allocation or other humanitarian efforts?

The principal investigators, professors Paul Spiegel at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Francesco Checchi at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, have disseminated the report through their networks with policymakers and humanitarian organizations internationally, including in the U.S., U.K., Israel, and Palestine. Key findings in our report have been published in all major news outlets and cited in the U.K. Parliament and the U.S. Senate.



A debriefing session that was most memorable to me was with USAID's Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance. Members of their response team had been studying our report and discussed in detail the parts of our projections that were directly related to their emergency relief plans.


Can your modeling approach and lessons learned be applied to other conflict zones or scenarios—such as Ukraine—or in places experiencing climate-change-induced movement of people?

One motivation for working on this project is that the new modeling approaches we develop can be applied to other contexts in the future. I have done some work on climate-induced migration, and the Gaza project has given me new insights and approaches that I can use to advance this migration research further.


Are there any other important points or considerations you wish to highlight regarding the team, its results, and your role?

This work is an example of the interdisciplinary collaboration that defines the One University concept of Johns Hopkins. There really are no barriers between our schools—and this has enabled a Whiting School faculty member like me to engage in challenging and rewarding humanitarian research.

Posted in Voices+Opinion , Politics+Society

Tagged middle east , international studies , human rights , international health

You might also like

News network.

• Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Get Email Updates
• Submit an Announcement
• Submit an Event
• Privacy Statement
• Accessibility

Discover JHU

• About the University
• Schools & Divisions
• Academic Programs
• Plan a Visit
• my.JohnsHopkins.edu
• © 2024 Johns Hopkins University . All rights reserved.
• University Communications
• 3910 Keswick Rd., Suite N2600, Baltimore, MD
• X Facebook LinkedIn YouTube Instagram

Read our research on: Gun Policy | International Conflict | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

About 1 in 4 u.s. teachers say their school went into a gun-related lockdown in the last school year.

Twenty-five years after the mass shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado , a majority of public K-12 teachers (59%) say they are at least somewhat worried about the possibility of a shooting ever happening at their school. This includes 18% who say they’re extremely or very worried, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

Pew Research Center conducted this analysis to better understand public K-12 teachers’ views on school shootings, how prepared they feel for a potential active shooter, and how they feel about policies that could help prevent future shootings.

To do this, we surveyed 2,531 U.S. public K-12 teachers from Oct. 17 to Nov. 14, 2023. The teachers are members of RAND’s American Teacher Panel, a nationally representative panel of public school K-12 teachers recruited through MDR Education. Survey data is weighted to state and national teacher characteristics to account for differences in sampling and response to ensure they are representative of the target population.

We also used data from our 2022 survey of U.S. parents. For that project, we surveyed 3,757 U.S. parents with at least one child younger than 18 from Sept. 20 to Oct. 2, 2022. Find more details about the survey of parents here .

Here are the questions used for this analysis , along with responses, and the survey methodology .

Another 31% of teachers say they are not too worried about a shooting occurring at their school. Only 7% of teachers say they are not at all worried.

This survey comes at a time when school shootings are at a record high (82 in 2023) and gun safety continues to be a topic in 2024 election campaigns .

Teachers’ experiences with lockdowns

About a quarter of teachers (23%) say they experienced a lockdown in the 2022-23 school year because of a gun or suspicion of a gun at their school. Some 15% say this happened once during the year, and 8% say this happened more than once.

High school teachers are most likely to report experiencing these lockdowns: 34% say their school went on at least one gun-related lockdown in the last school year. This compares with 22% of middle school teachers and 16% of elementary school teachers.

Teachers in urban schools are also more likely to say that their school had a gun-related lockdown. About a third of these teachers (31%) say this, compared with 19% of teachers in suburban schools and 20% in rural schools.

Do teachers feel their school has prepared them for an active shooter?

About four-in-ten teachers (39%) say their school has done a fair or poor job providing them with the training and resources they need to deal with a potential active shooter.

A smaller share (30%) give their school an excellent or very good rating, and another 30% say their school has done a good job preparing them.

Teachers in urban schools are the least likely to say their school has done an excellent or very good job preparing them for a potential active shooter. About one-in-five (21%) say this, compared with 32% of teachers in suburban schools and 35% in rural schools.

Teachers who have police officers or armed security stationed in their school are more likely than those who don’t to say their school has done an excellent or very good job preparing them for a potential active shooter (36% vs. 22%).

Overall, 56% of teachers say they have police officers or armed security stationed at their school. Majorities in rural schools (64%) and suburban schools (56%) say this, compared with 48% in urban schools.

Only 3% of teachers say teachers and administrators at their school are allowed to carry guns in school. This is slightly more common in school districts where a majority of voters cast ballots for Donald Trump in 2020 than in school districts where a majority of voters cast ballots for Joe Biden (5% vs. 1%).

What strategies do teachers think could help prevent school shootings?

The survey also asked teachers how effective some measures would be at preventing school shootings.

Most teachers (69%) say improving mental health screening and treatment for children and adults would be extremely or very effective.

About half (49%) say having police officers or armed security in schools would be highly effective, while 33% say the same about metal detectors in schools.

Just 13% say allowing teachers and school administrators to carry guns in schools would be extremely or very effective at preventing school shootings. Seven-in-ten teachers say this would be not too or not at all effective.

How teachers’ views differ by party

Republican and Republican-leaning teachers are more likely than Democratic and Democratic-leaning teachers to say each of the following would be highly effective:

• Having police officers or armed security in schools (69% vs. 37%)
• Having metal detectors in schools (43% vs. 27%)
• Allowing teachers and school administrators to carry guns in schools (28% vs. 3%)

And while majorities in both parties say improving mental health screening and treatment would be highly effective at preventing school shootings, Democratic teachers are more likely than Republican teachers to say this (73% vs. 66%).

Parents’ views on school shootings and prevention strategies

In fall 2022, we asked parents a similar set of questions about school shootings.

Roughly a third of parents with K-12 students (32%) said they were extremely or very worried about a shooting ever happening at their child’s school. An additional 37% said they were somewhat worried.

As is the case among teachers, improving mental health screening and treatment was the only strategy most parents (63%) said would be extremely or very effective at preventing school shootings. And allowing teachers and school administrators to carry guns in schools was seen as the least effective – in fact, half of parents said this would be not too or not at all effective. This question was asked of all parents with a child younger than 18, regardless of whether they have a child in K-12 schools.

Like teachers, parents’ views on strategies for preventing school shootings differed by party. 

Note: Here are the questions used for this analysis , along with responses, and the survey methodology .

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivered Saturday mornings

‘Back to school’ means anytime from late July to after Labor Day, depending on where in the U.S. you live

Among many u.s. children, reading for fun has become less common, federal data shows, most european students learn english in school, for u.s. teens today, summer means more schooling and less leisure time than in the past, about one-in-six u.s. teachers work second jobs – and not just in the summer, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

• AJPP – US Jewish Population Estimates
• Birthright Israel Publications
• Birthright Israel Public Use Datafiles
• Jewish Futures Project
• Research Team
• Local Jewish Community Population Studies
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Community Studies Publications
• CMJS Combined Dataset
• Jews of the Americas Spring 2024 Events
• Antisemitism
• COVID-19 Impact
• Intermarriage
• Life on Campus
• Jewish Education
• Organizational and Leadership Development
• Publications
• CMJS in the News
• Conferences
• Degree Programs
• Majors and Minors
• Graduate Programs
• The Brandeis Core
• School of Arts and Sciences
• Brandeis Online
• Brandeis International Business School
• Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
• Heller School for Social Policy and Management
• Rabb School of Continuing Studies
• Precollege Programs
• Faculty and Researcher Directory
• Brandeis Library
• Academic Calendar
• Undergraduate Admissions
• Summer School
• Financial Aid
• Research that Matters
• Resources for Researchers
• Brandeis Researchers in the News
• Provost Research Grants
• Recent Awards
• Faculty Research
• Student Research
• Centers and Institutes
• Office of the Vice Provost for Research
• Office of the Provost
• Housing/Community Living
• Campus Calendar
• Student Engagement
• Clubs and Organizations
• Community Service
• Dean of Students Office
• Orientation
• Hiatt Career Center
• Spiritual Life
• Graduate Student Affairs
• Directory of Campus Contacts
• Division of Creative Arts
• Brandeis Arts Engagement
• Rose Art Museum
• Bernstein Festival of the Creative Arts
• Theater Arts Productions
• Brandeis Concert Series
• Public Sculpture at Brandeis
• Women's Studies Research Center
• Creative Arts Award
• Our Jewish Roots
• The Framework for the Future
• Mission and Diversity Statements
• Distinguished Faculty
• Nobel Prize 2017
• Notable Alumni
• Administration
• Working at Brandeis
• Commencement
• Offices Directory
• Faculty & Staff
• Alumni & Friends
• Parents & Families
• 75th Anniversary
• New Students
• Shuttle Schedules
• Support at Brandeis

Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies

Drawing the line: how us jewish college students think about antisemitism.

Graham Wright , Sasha Volodarsky ,  Shahar Hecht , and Leonard Saxe

In our December 2023 report , we documented the level of anti-Jewish and anti-Israel hostility on 51 US campuses since the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel. One question prompted by our findings was how Jewish students “draw the line” between acceptable political discourse and antisemitism. Guidelines developed to define antisemitism (IHRA, NEXUS, JDA) agree that while criticism of Israel is not necessarily antisemitic, particular statements can be, depending on the broader context. This report explores which forms of anti-Israel sentiments are viewed by Jewish college students as “crossing the line” into antisemitism, including critical statements about Israel that have received attention during the ongoing Israel-Hamas war. The findings are based on survey data collected in November-December 2023 from more than 2,000 Jewish undergraduate students at 51 US colleges and universities with large Jewish student populations. 

• Read the report
• Read the technical appendices

Key Findings

• Even in the intense period soon after October 7, Jewish college students had relatively nuanced views about what constituted antisemitism. There was near universal agreement that claims that “Jews have too much power” or that “Israel has no right to exist” were antisemitic. At the same time, most of our Jewish respondents did not consider the claim that Israel violated the human rights of the Palestinian people to be antisemitic.
• Similarly, the vast majority of respondents felt that a popular phrase used by protest groups, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” was at least “probably” antisemitic, and most thought it was “definitely” antisemitic. Far fewer felt the same way about other provocative criticism of Israel, such as that it is an “apartheid state” or is committing “genocide.”
• Respondents who were more favorable toward the Israeli government, or who had a stronger emotional connection to Israel, were more likely to consider these statements antisemitic. However, even among respondents with unfavorable views of the Israeli government and/or limited emotional connections to Israel, many viewed some of these statements, such as the slogan “from the river to the sea,” as antisemitic. 
• By and large, these Jewish students’ strong ties to Israel did not preclude them from having unfavorable views toward the Israeli government, nor did their negative view of Hamas spill over into apathy toward the lives of the Palestinian people. Respondents expressed very high levels of concern about the lives of Israelis and the lives of Palestinians in Gaza.

Takeaways and Implications

• The vast majority of Jewish students view denying Israel’s right to exist as antisemitic . Campus administrators should be aware that statements calling for Israel’s destruction are seen as calls for the murder of Israelis and considered antisemitic by the vast majority of Jewish students, including those who are critical of Israel’s government.
• Most Jewish students see the slogan “from the river to sea” as antisemitic.  Although many critics of Israel who use this slogan view it as a call for equal rights, most of the Jewish college students in our study appear to understand the statement as reflecting a  de facto  call for the elimination of Israel, or as reflecting solidarity with Hamas’s attacks on Jewish civilians.
• Jewish students differ among themselves about whether calling Israel an “apartheid state” or accusing it of "genocide" rise to the level of antisemitism.  Understanding  why  Jews might see these statements as being antisemitic in certain contexts (but perhaps not in others) is important for facilitating productive dialogue.
• Variations in the campus climate with regard to antisemitism is not merely a function of Jews at certain campuses being especially “sensitive” to antisemitism . Regardless of their own views about Israel and their own operational definitions of what constitutes antisemitism, Jewish students see antisemitism related to criticism of Israel as a serious problem.
• For most Jewish students, there is no inherent conflict between being emotionally connected to Israel and being critical of the Israeli government . It should be possible to facilitate respectful discussions about Israel that leave space for intense criticism without causing serious offense to Jews who see Israel as an important part of their identity. Inhibiting students’ ability to express criticism of Israel and its actions may further isolate Jewish students from one another and from their non-Jewish peers.

This report is the second in a series aimed at identifying evidence-based strategies for effectively responding to antisemitism on campus.

• Birthright Israel Research
• Local Jewish Community Studies
• Jews of the Americas
• News and Events