Background: The scientific article in the health sciences evolved from the letter form and purely descriptive style in the seventeenth century to a very. The results section of the research paper is where you report the findings of your study based upon the information gathered as a result of the methodology [or. Title, Abstract and Keywords · Introduction, Methods and Results · Discussion The studies you cite should be strongly related to your research question. Also, as another guide, look at previously published papers in the journal or sample.
paper research methods results
Although both humour and personal anecdotes are generally discouraged in APA-style writing, this example is a highly effective way to start because it both engages the reader and provides an excellent real-world example of the topic under study. However, the literature review is not simply a list of past studies. Instead, it constitutes a kind of argument for why the research question is worth addressing. By the end of the literature review, readers should be convinced that the research question makes sense and that the present study is a logical next step in the ongoing research process.
Like any effective argument, the literature review must have some kind of structure. For example, it might begin by describing a phenomenon in a general way along with several studies that demonstrate it, then describing two or more competing theories of the phenomenon, and finally presenting a hypothesis to test one or more of the theories.
Or it might describe one phenomenon, then describe another phenomenon that seems inconsistent with the first one, then propose a theory that resolves the inconsistency, and finally present a hypothesis to test that theory. In applied research, it might describe a phenomenon or theory, then describe how that phenomenon or theory applies to some important real-world situation, and finally suggest a way to test whether it does, in fact, apply to that situation.
Looking at the literature review in this way emphasizes a few things. First, it is extremely important to start with an outline of the main points that you want to make, organized in the order that you want to make them.
The basic structure of your argument, then, should be apparent from the outline itself. Second, it is important to emphasize the structure of your argument in your writing. One way to do this is to begin the literature review by summarizing your argument even before you begin to make it.
Here are some simple examples:. Finally, remember that your goal is to construct an argument for why your research question is interesting and worth addressing—not necessarily why your favourite answer to it is correct. In other words, your literature review must be balanced. If you want to emphasize the generality of a phenomenon, then of course you should discuss various studies that have demonstrated it. However, if there are other studies that have failed to demonstrate it, you should discuss them too.
Or if you are proposing a new theory, then of course you should discuss findings that are consistent with that theory. However, if there are other findings that are inconsistent with it, again, you should discuss them too. Besides, a large part of what makes a research question interesting is uncertainty about its answer.
The first is a clear statement of the main research question or hypothesis. This statement tends to be more formal and precise than in the opening and is often expressed in terms of operational definitions of the key variables.
The second is a brief overview of the method and some comment on its appropriateness. These considerations lead to the hypothesis that the more bystanders to an emergency, the less likely, or the more slowly, any one bystander will intervene to provide aid.
Each subject should also be blocked from communicating with others to prevent his getting information about their behaviour during the emergency. The experiment reported below attempted to fulfill these conditions.
Thus the introduction leads smoothly into the next major section of the article—the method section. At the same time, it should avoid irrelevant details such as the fact that the study was conducted in Classroom 37B of the Industrial Technology Building or that the questionnaire was double-sided and completed using pencils.
The participants subsection indicates how many participants there were, the number of women and men, some indication of their age, other demographics that may be relevant to the study, and how they were recruited, including any incentives given for participation.
After the participants section, the structure can vary a bit. Figure In the first, the participants section is followed by a design and procedure subsection, which describes the rest of the method. This works well for methods that are relatively simple and can be described adequately in a few paragraphs. In the second approach, the participants section is followed by separate design and procedure subsections.
This works well when both the design and the procedure are relatively complicated and each requires multiple paragraphs. What is the difference between design and procedure? The design of a study is its overall structure.
What were the independent and dependent variables? Was the independent variable manipulated, and if so, was it manipulated between or within subjects? How were the variables operationally defined? The procedure is how the study was carried out. It often works well to describe the procedure in terms of what the participants did rather than what the researchers did.
For example, the participants gave their informed consent, read a set of instructions, completed a block of four practice trials, completed a block of 20 test trials, completed two questionnaires, and were debriefed and excused. In the third basic way to organize a method section, the participants subsection is followed by a materials subsection before the design and procedure subsections. This works well when there are complicated materials to describe.
This might mean multiple questionnaires, written vignettes that participants read and respond to, perceptual stimuli, and so on. The heading of this subsection can be modified to reflect its content. Although there are no standard subsections, it is still important for the results section to be logically organized.
Typically it begins with certain preliminary issues. One is whether any participants or responses were excluded from the analyses and why. The rationale for excluding data should be described clearly so that other researchers can decide whether it is appropriate.
A second preliminary issue is how multiple responses were combined to produce the primary variables in the analyses.
For example, if participants rated the attractiveness of 20 stimulus people, you might have to explain that you began by computing the mean attractiveness rating for each participant. Or if they recalled as many items as they could from study list of 20 words, did you count the number correctly recalled, compute the percentage correctly recalled, or perhaps compute the number correct minus the number incorrect?
A third preliminary issue is the reliability of the measures. A final preliminary issue is whether the manipulation was successful. This is where you would report the results of any manipulation checks. The results section should then tackle the primary research questions, one at a time. Majority of the respondents also have an annual gross household income that does not exceed P50, They influence the mothers in deciding to feed the baby with formula and in choosing, as well, which brand of formula is best for their babies.
Mothers were overall not concerned about the possible side effects of breastfeeding as a few were only worried as shown in the data presented. It can be concluded that numerous internal as well as external factors influence a mother in making infant feeding decisions, and a greater fraction of these is socio-economic in nature.
Check out our quiz-page with tests about:. Research Paper Example. Retrieved Apr 06, from Explorable. The text in this article is licensed under the Creative Commons-License Attribution 4. That is it. You can use it freely with some kind of link , and we're also okay with people reprinting in publications like books, blogs, newsletters, course-material, papers, wikipedia and presentations with clear attribution.
Example of a Research Paper. Site Menu. Search website. Check Out the Official Book Learn how to construct, style and format an Academic paper and take your skills to the next level. Read More also available as ebook. This article is a part of the guide: Select from one of the other courses available: Don't miss these related articles:. Save this course for later Don't have time for it all now?
Add to my courses. Additional Info Links. Complete Collection. Like Explorable? Take it with you wherever you go. Thank you to Innovation Norway. What answer s have you found to your research question? If you have a hypothesis, has it been strengthened, weakened or falisified? Do not introduce issues here that have not been mentioned earlier. If the results of your study do not allow you to draw any conclusions, you can end with a summing up.
Aveyard, H. Open University Press. Abbreviations Why cite sources? Skip to secondary content.
The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a fifty-year survey
Title: How to Write a Research Paper Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions Without. Developing an Overwhelming and Compulsive Urge to Kill. This section is variously called Methods or Methods and Materials. You should also indicate the statistical procedures used to analyze your results, . advice on particular problems common to new scientific writers. The methodology section of a research paper answers two main because an unreliable method produces unreliable results and, as a.