Results and discussion in research paper

To create keywords for a research related sion and peer ation h editorial , resources, and feature is only available to registered er with editage insights! A full understanding of the limitations of your research is part of a good discussion this stage, you may want to revisit your literature review, unless you submitted it as a separate submission earlier, and revise it to draw out those studies which have proven more de by summarising the implications of your findings in brief, and explain why they are important for researchers and in practice, and provide some suggestions for further may also wish to make some recommendations for practice.

It is rarely clear-cut, and you will need to interpret your example, one of your graphs may show a distinct trend, but not enough to reach an acceptable significance er that no significance is not the same as no difference, and you can begin to explain this in your discussion your results may not be enough to reject the null hypothesis, they may show a trend that later researchers may wish to explore, perhaps by refining the -criticism at the heart of writing a discussion section for this purpose, you should criticize the experiment, and be honest about whether your design was good enough. The sequence of this information is important; first state the answer, then the relevant results, then cite the work of others.

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. The letter was usually single authored, written in a polite style, and addressed several subjects at the same time [1].

The anatomy of an article: the discussion section: "how does the article i read today change what i will recommend to my patients tomorrow? Pereira: @arierepm author information ► article notes ► copyright and license information ►received 2003 aug; accepted 2004 ght © 2004, medical library associationthis article has been corrected.

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. In order to convince your readers that your results are meaningful, you must first demonstrate that the conditions of the study were met.

San francisco edit, ure and writing are the general rules you should adopt when composing your discussion of the results:Do not be verbose or concise and make your points a logical stream of thought; in general, interpret and discuss the significance of your findings in the same sequence you described them in your results the present verb tense, especially for established facts; however, refer to specific works or prior studies in the past needed, use subheadings to help organize your discussion or to categorize your interpretations into content of the discussion section of your paper most often includes:Explanation of results: comment on whether or not the results were expected for each set of results; go into greater depth when explaining findings that were unexpected or especially profound. If not, suggest any modifications and improvements that could be made to the the reason that you did not find a significant correlation is because your sampling was not random, or you did not use sensitive enough discussion section is not always about what you found, but what you did not find, and how you deal with that.

For each theme or area, you should discuss how the results help to answer your research question, and whether the results are consistent with your expectations and the importance of understanding your results are controversial and/or unexpected, you should set them fully in context and explain why you think that you obtained explanations may include issues such as a non-representative sample for convenience purposes, a response rate skewed towards those with a particular experience, or your own involvement as a participant for sociological do not need to be apologetic about these, because you made a choice about them, which you should have justified in the methodology section. In the early twentieth century, contemporary norms began to be standardized with a decreasing use of the literary style.

This can include re-visiting key sources already cited in your literature review section, or, save them to cite later in the discussion section if they are more important to compare with your results instead of being a part of the general literature review of research used to provide context and background information. 2004 october; 92(4): article has been cited by other articles in ctbackground: the scientific article in the health sciences evolved from the letter form and purely descriptive style in the seventeenth century to a very standardized structure in the twentieth century known as introduction, methods, results, and discussion (imrad).

It evolved to a more structured form in which methods and results were incipiently described and interpreted, while the letter form disappeared [2]. Systematic description of your results, highlighting for the reader observations that are most relevant to the topic under investigation [remember that not all results that emerge from the methodology used to gather information may be related to answering the "so what?

Method description increasingly developed during the second half of the nineteenth century [3], and an overall organization known as “theory—experiment—discussion” appeared [4, 5]. Neither the rate at which the use of this format increased nor the point at which it became the standard for today's medical scientific writing is well established.

Short paragraph that concludes the results section by synthesizing the key findings of the study. Organization and most research paper formats in the social and behavioral sciences, there are two possible ways of presenting and organizing the results.

The procedure should include:A description of the experimental design and how participants were assigned fication of your independent variable(s) (iv), dependent variable(s) (dv), and control variables. Please see our apa formatting guide for specific the owl you're requesting copies of this the owl you're linking to this ght ©1995-2017 by the writing lab & the owl at purdue and purdue rights reserved.

The influence of other disciplines and the recommendations of editors are among the facts that contributed to authors adhering to its origin in 1665, the scientific paper has been through many changes. The imrad structure facilitates modular reading, because readers usually do not read in a linear way but browse in each section of the article, looking for specific information, which is normally found in preestablished areas of the paper [15].

A section describing results is particularly necessary if your paper includes data generated from your own ey, thomas m. You should frame your suggestions by linking the need for further research to the limitations of your study [e.

Organize the discussion from the general to the specific, linking your findings to the literature, then to theory, then to practice [if appropriate]. As before, this may be a separate section, or included in your results and discussion, including conclusion and recommendations, are probably the most substantial sections of your dissertation.