dissertation vs applied research

Dissertation Essentials

• Dissertation Essentials: Home
• Doctoral Record
• Working Ahead Guidelines

Differentiating between Doctorate Degrees

Contribution of new knowledge.

• Student Experience Feedback Buttons
• Technology Resources
• Published Dissertations
• School of Health Professions
• Scholarly Writing This link opens in a new window
• Qualitative & Quantitative Research Support with the ASC This link opens in a new window
• Library Basic Training for Doctoral Students This link opens in a new window
• Dissertation Toolkit Series with the Library This link opens in a new window
• Template Formatting Help This link opens in a new window
• APA 7th Edition Help This link opens in a new window

This section outlines various characteristics of doctoral programs and the associated research processes and resources that help to distinguish research degrees (Ph.D.) from applied degrees: DHA*, DBA, EdD*, DNP*, DMFT*.

The key research design differences between an applied and research degree are scope and significance. Both degree tracks require that the stated research design demonstrate scientific rigor. However, the applied degree will be limited in scope to the specific study context and the results should be significant to leaders and practitioners in the field. Research (Ph.D.) studies must have theoretical implications and make a contribution to the literature.

*Students in the EdD, DMFT, DHA, DNP program will complete a doctoral project/dissertation-in-practice via the Applied Doctoral Experience (ADE) vs completing a dissertation as part of the Doctoral Student Experience (DSE). 

The current guidelines are that a dissertation must:

• Summarize, analyze, and integrate scholarly literature and research relevant to a topic area, focusing on developments in the area in the previous five years, and,
• Present original research in an area related to a student’s program and specialization.

While Ph.D. dissertations demonstrate how the research contributes to theoretical development in an area, applied doctorate dissertations typically contribute to practice.

The current DSE standards include the non-negotiable requirement of every doctoral manuscript (Ph.D. or applied doctorate) to include a comprehensive, up-to-date, and critically evaluative review of the professional and scientific, peer-reviewed literature pertaining to its topic. A Ph.D. requires original ideas about a specialized topic, as well as a high degree of methodological/scientific rigor (Nelson, & Coorough, 1994). As is traditional in higher education, a Ph.D. is only going to be awarded for a piece of work that will actually make a difference to the theoretical context of the field --- the Ph.D. dissertation is a new contribution to the body of knowledge.

An applied dissertation requires the practical application of scholarship (Nelson, & Coorough,1994; Wergin, 2011). Examples of an applied investigation may include a replication study, a case study, program evaluation, or a special project (such as, for example, the creation of a curriculum, training program, clinical protocol or policy, or educational artifact), followed by an evaluation. A doctoral project for a professional degree does not have to be an original contribution to the body of knowledge that impacts the theories in the field but typically responds to a practical problem or proposed innovation (Archibald, 2010).

The fundamental differentiation between Ph.D. research programs and professional degree research programs is that the focus of the Ph.D. is to contribute new knowledge to the field. The focus of professional degree research programs is to apply theoretical knowledge to the advancement of practice in the field (solve complex problems) (Archibald, 2010; Corley & Giola 2011; Huba, Shubb & Shelley, 2006).

Archibald, D. (2010). “Breaking the mold” in the dissertation: Implementing a problem-based, decision-oriented thesis project. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 58(2), 99-107. 

Corley, K. G. & Giola, D. (2011). Building Theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 12-32. 

Huba, M. Shubb, J. & Shelley, J. (2006). Recasting doctoral education in an outcomes-based framework. In P. Maki & N. Borkowski (Eds.), The assessment of doctoral education: Emerging criteria and new models for improving outcomes (239-272). Sterling VA: Stylus. 

Nelson, J.K., & Coorough, C. (1994). Content analysis of the Ph.D. versus Ed.D. dissertation. The Journal of Experimental Education, 62(2), 158-168.

Wergin, J.F. (2011). Rebooting the Ed.D.. Harvard Educational Review, 81(1), 119-140.

Differentiating scholarly contribution of new knowledge between Ph.D. and applied doctorates (e.g., DBA, EdD, DMFT) includes two criteria to determine contribution: originality and utility.

Originality

Originality is measured by assessing whether the knowledge derived in the research has the quality of being either, "incremental" (appropriate for professional degrees such as a DBA, Ed.D. or Psy.D.) or "revelatory" (most sought-after for the Ph.D.). This means that the research adds value in such a way that it either advances our understanding of prevailing theory (incremental), or it allows us to see something that we have never seen before (revelatory).

Utility means the research must generate knowledge that is of either "scientific value" or “practical value.” Scientific value (predominate measure for Ph.D.) advances our conceptual rigor or enhances its potential for operationalization and testing, broadly. That means the scope of a project must be great enough such that it contributes to, extends, or facilitates extension, of theory. Practical value advances our ability to apply theory directly, in managerial and organizational pursuits, in education and healthcare settings, or in therapeutic or counseling settings.

Was this resource helpful?

• << Previous: Working Ahead Guidelines
• Next: Technology Resources >>
• Last Updated: Apr 25, 2024 12:27 PM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1005138

© Copyright 2024 National University. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy | Consumer Information

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• Types of Research Designs Compared | Guide & Examples

Types of Research Designs Compared | Guide & Examples

Published on June 20, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on June 22, 2023.

When you start planning a research project, developing research questions and creating a  research design , you will have to make various decisions about the type of research you want to do.

There are many ways to categorize different types of research. The words you use to describe your research depend on your discipline and field. In general, though, the form your research design takes will be shaped by:

• The type of knowledge you aim to produce
• The type of data you will collect and analyze
• The sampling methods , timescale and location of the research

This article takes a look at some common distinctions made between different types of research and outlines the key differences between them.

Table of contents

Types of research aims, types of research data, types of sampling, timescale, and location, other interesting articles.

The first thing to consider is what kind of knowledge your research aims to contribute.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

The next thing to consider is what type of data you will collect. Each kind of data is associated with a range of specific research methods and procedures.

Finally, you have to consider three closely related questions: how will you select the subjects or participants of the research? When and how often will you collect data from your subjects? And where will the research take place?

Keep in mind that the methods that you choose bring with them different risk factors and types of research bias . Biases aren’t completely avoidable, but can heavily impact the validity and reliability of your findings if left unchecked.

Choosing between all these different research types is part of the process of creating your research design , which determines exactly how your research will be conducted. But the type of research is only the first step: next, you have to make more concrete decisions about your research methods and the details of the study.

Read more about creating a research design

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

• Normal distribution
• Degrees of freedom
• Null hypothesis
• Discourse analysis
• Control groups
• Mixed methods research
• Non-probability sampling
• Quantitative research
• Ecological validity

Research bias

• Rosenthal effect
• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Selection bias
• Negativity bias
• Status quo bias

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, June 22). Types of Research Designs Compared | Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved July 22, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/types-of-research/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a research design | types, guide & examples, qualitative vs. quantitative research | differences, examples & methods, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Dissertation Versus Project Study: What’s the Difference?

There are alternatives to writing a dissertation. One of these is a project study, or an applied study. Most students in advanced studies have a general idea of what a dissertation is, but fewer people know what a project study is. It is good to know the difference between a dissertation and a project study before you make the choice to pursue one or the other. If you have already chosen a project study, however, and are still not sure what it entails, this blog may help you.

Discover How We Assist to Edit Your Dissertation Chapters

Aligning theoretical framework, gathering articles, synthesizing gaps, articulating a clear methodology and data plan, and writing about the theoretical and practical implications of your research are part of our comprehensive dissertation editing services.

• Bring dissertation editing expertise to chapters 1-5 in timely manner.
• Track all changes, then work with you to bring about scholarly writing.
• Ongoing support to address committee feedback, reducing revisions.

Most of us know that a dissertation is an extended piece of research. A typical structure for a dissertation in the social sciences is five chapters: introduction, literature review, methodology, results, and discussion. A central feature of the dissertation is the research problem. The research problem is the impetus for conducting a study: there is inconclusiveness about a topic in the literature or a gap in our understanding of a phenomenon. This inconclusiveness or gap serves as a rationale for conducting the study and drives the research questions, which are designed to collect information to add to our understanding of the topic.

The key difference between a project study and a dissertation is that a project study does not proceed from a research problem. The purpose of a project study is not to add to our understanding of research on a topic. The purpose of a project study is to help solve an existing local real-world problem, which is why project studies are also called applied studies. The purpose of a project study is to collect information to help address an identifiable problem in a specific setting.

Let’s say, for example, graduation rates at a particular high school are lower than state and national averages. Low graduation rates, likely the result of dropout, would be the specific local problem. A project study would be appropriate to collect information on how to address the problem of low graduation rates at that school. Information collected from the study culminates in an applied document, such as policy recommendations, curricular design, or a program evaluation. The applied document is a key feature of the project study and offers evidenced-based ways to address the local problem.

Applied Research

Applied research “aims at finding a solution for an immediate problem facing a society, or an industrial/business organisation, whereas fundamental research is mainly concerned with generalisations and with the formulation of a theory” [1] . Applied research is considered to be non-systematic inquiry and it is usually launched by a company, agency or an individual in order to address a specific problem. [2]

   Applied research can be divided into the following three categories:

1. Evaluation research . This type of research focuses on analysing existing information about the phenomenon in order to generate objective research outcomes. A study into the ways of reducing supply-chain costs can be mentioned as an example for an evaluation research.

2. Research and Development . It is a type of applied research that focuses on the development of new products and services to satisfy needs and wants of target customer segment. This type of applied research is the least relevant to a business dissertation.

3. Action research . This type of study aims to tackle specific business problems. For example, a research into the ways of restoring Starbucks brand image in UK after the tax scandal can be classified as an action research.

Differences between Applied Research and Fundamental (Basic) Research

The difference between applied and  fundamental or basic research  is straightforward – findings of applied research can be applied to resolve problems, whereas fundamental studies are used simply to explore certain issues and elements. Applied research can be a follow-up to the findings of a fundamental research.

Moreover, differences between applied and basic research can be summarized into three points:

1. Differences in purpose . Purpose of applied studies is closely associated with the solution of specific problems, while the purpose of fundamental studies relate to creation of new knowledge or expansion of the current knowledge without any concerns to applicability.

2. Differences in context . In applied studies, research objectives are set by clients or sponsors as a solution to specific problems they are facing. Fundamental studies, on the other hand, are usually self-initiated in order to expand the levels of knowledge in certain areas.

3. Differences in methods .  Research validity is an important point to be addressed in all types of studies. Nevertheless, applied studies are usually more concerned with external validity, whereas internal validity can be specified as the main point of concern for fundamental researchers.

Examples of Applied Research

The following are examples for applied research. You can notice that each of these studies aim to resolve a specific and an immediate problem.

• A study into marketing strategies to appeal to the aspirations of millenials in China
• An investigation into the ways of improving employee motivation in Marriot Hotel, Hyde Park
• Development of strategies to introduce change in Starbucks global supply-chain management with the view on cost reduction
• A study into the ways of fostering creative deviance amongst employees without compromising respect for authority.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Applied Research

The advantages and disadvantages of applied and fundamental research mirror and contrast each other. On the positive side, applied research can be helpful in solving specific problems in business and other settings.

On the negative side, findings of applied research cannot be usually generalized. In other words, applicability of the new knowledge generated as a result of this type of research is limited to the research problem. Moreover, applied studies usually have tight deadlines which are not flexible.

You need to specify the type of your research in the earlier part of the research methodology chapter in about one short paragraph. Also, in this paragraph you will have to justify your choice of research type.

My e-book,  The Ultimate Guide to Writing a Dissertation in Business Studies: a step by step assistance   contains discussions of research types and application of research methods in practice. The e-book also explains all stages of the  research process  starting from the  selection of the research area  to writing personal reflection. Important elements of dissertations such as  research philosophy ,  research approach ,  research design ,  methods of data collection  and  data analysis , sampling and others are explained in this e-book in simple words.

John Dudovskiy

[1] Kothari, C.R. (2008) “Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques” New Age International

[2] Bajpai, N. (2011) “Business Research Methods” Pearson Education India

What Exactly Is A Dissertation (Or Thesis)?

If you’ve landed on this article, chances are you’ve got a dissertation or thesis project coming up (hopefully it’s not due next week!), and you’re now asking yourself the classic question, “what the #%#%^ is a dissertation?”…

In this post, I’ll break down the basics of exactly what a dissertation is, in plain language. No ivory tower academia.

So, let’s get to the pressing question – what is a dissertation?

A dissertation (or thesis) = a research project

Simply put, a dissertation (or thesis – depending on which country you’re studying in) is a research project . In other words, your task is to ask a research question (or set of questions) and then set about finding the answer(s). Simple enough, right?

Well, the catch is that you’ve got to undertake this research project in an academic fashion , and there’s a wealth of academic language that makes it all (look) rather confusing (thanks, academia). However, at its core, a dissertation is about undertaking research (investigating something). This is really important to understand, because the key skill that your university is trying to develop in you (and will be testing you on) is your ability to undertake research in a well-structured structured, critical and academically rigorous way.

This research-centric focus is significantly different from assignments or essays, where the main concern is whether you can understand and apply the prescribed module theory. I’ll explain some other key differences between dissertations or theses and assignments a bit later in this article, but for now, let’s dig a little deeper into what a dissertation is.

A dissertation (or thesis) is a process.

Okay, so now that you understand that a dissertation is a research project (which is testing your ability to undertake quality research), let’s go a little deeper into what that means in practical terms.

The best way to understand a dissertation is to view it as a process – more specifically a research process (it is a research project, after all). This process involves four essential steps, which I’ll discuss below.

Step 1 – You identify a worthy research question

The very first step of the research process is to find a meaningful research question, or a set of questions. In other words, you need to find a suitable topic for investigation. Since a dissertation is all about research, identifying the key question(s) is the critical first step. Here’s an example of a well-defined research question:

“Which factors cultivate or erode customer trust in UK-based life insurance brokers?”

This clearly defined question sets the direction of the research . From the question alone, you can understand exactly what the outcome of the research might look like – i.e. a set of findings about which factors help brokers develop customer trust, and which factors negatively impact trust.

But how on earth do I find a suitable research question, you ask? Don’t worry about this right now – when you’re ready, you can read our article about finding a dissertation topic . However, right now, the important thing to understand is that the first step in the dissertation process is identifying the key research question(s). Without a clear question, you cannot move forward.

Step 2 – You review the existing research

Once the research question is clearly established, the next step is to review the existing research/literature (both academic and professional/industry) to understand what has already been said with regard to the question. In academic speak, this is called a literature review .

This step is critically important as, in all likelihood, someone else has asked a similar question to yours, and therefore you can build on the work of others . Good academic research is not about reinventing the wheel or starting from scratch – it’s about familiarising yourself with the current state of knowledge, and then using that as your basis for further research.

Simply put, the first step to answering your research question is to look at what other researchers have to say about it. Sometimes this will lead you to change your research question or direction slightly (for example, if the existing research already provides a comprehensive answer). Don’t stress – this is completely acceptable and a normal part of the research process.

Step 3 – You carry out your own research

Once you’ve got a decent understanding of the existing state of knowledge, you will carry out your own research by collecting and analysing the relevant data. This could take to form of primary research (collecting your own fresh data), secondary research (synthesising existing data) or both, depending on the nature of your degree, research question(s) and even your university’s specific requirements.

Exactly what data you collect and how you go about analysing it depends largely on the research question(s) you are asking, but very often you will take either a qualitative approach (e.g. interviews or focus groups) or a quantitative approach (e.g. online surveys). In other words, your research approach can be words-based, numbers-based, or both . Don’t let the terminology scare you and don’t worry about these technical details for now – we’ll explain research methodology in later posts .

Step 4 – You develop answers to your research question(s)

Combining your understanding of the existing research (Step 2) with the findings from your own original research (Step 3), you then (attempt to) answer your original research question (s). The process of asking, investigating and then answering has gone full circle.

Of course, your research won’t always provide rock-solid answers to your original questions, and indeed you might find that your findings spur new questions altogether. Don’t worry – this is completely acceptable and is a natural part of the research process.

So, to recap, a dissertation is best understood as a research process, where you are:

• Ask a meaningful research question(s)
• Carry out the research (both existing research and your own)
• Analyse the results to develop an answer to your original research question(s).

Depending on your specific degree and the way your university designs its coursework, you might be asking yourself “but isn’t this just a longer version of a normal assignment?”. Well, it’s quite possible that your previous assignments required a similar research process, but there are some key differences you need to be aware of, which I’ll explain next.

Same same, but different…

While there are, naturally, similarities between dissertations/theses and assignments, its important to understand the differences  so that you approach your dissertation with the right mindset and focus your energy on the right things. Here, I’ll discuss four ways in which writing a dissertation differs substantially from assignments and essays, and why this matters.

Difference #1 – You must decide (and live with) the direction.

Unlike assignments or essays, where the general topic is determined for you, for your dissertation, you will (typically) be the one who decides on your research questions and overall direction. This means that you will need to:

• Find a suitable research question (or set of questions)
• Justify why its worth investigating (in the form of a research proposal )
• Find all the relevant existing research and familiarise yourself with the theory

This is very different from assignments, where the theory is given to you on a platter, and the direction is largely pre-defined. Therefore, before you start the dissertation process, you need to understand the basics of academic research, how to find a suitable research topic and how to source the relevant literature.

Difference #2 – It’s a long project, and you’re on your own.

A dissertation is a long journey, at least compared to assignments. Typically, you will spend 3 – 6 months writing around 15,000 – 25,000 words (for Masters-level, much more for PhD) on just one subject. Therefore, successfully completing your dissertation requires a substantial amount of stamina .

To make it even more challenging, your classmates will not be researching the same thing as you are, so you have limited support, other than your supervisor (who may be very busy). This can make it quite a lonely journey . Therefore, you need a lot of self-discipline and self-direction in order to see it through to the end. You should also try to build a support network of people who can help you through the process (perhaps alumni, faculty or a private coach ).

Difference #3 – They’re testing research skills.

We touched on this earlier. Unlike assignments or essays, where the markers are assessing your ability to understand and apply the theories, models and frameworks that they provide you with, your dissertation will be is assessing your ability to undertake high-quality research in an academically rigorous manner.

Of course, your ability to understand the relevant theory (i.e. within your literature review) is still very important, but this is only one piece of the research skills puzzle. You need to demonstrate the full spectrum of research skills.

It’s important to note that your research does not need to be ground-breaking, revolutionary or world-changing – that is not what the markers are assessing. They are assessing whether you can apply well-established research principles and skills to a worthwhile topic of enquiry. Don’t feel like you need to solve the world’s major problems. It’s simply not going to happen (you’re a first-time researcher, after all) – and doesn’t need to happen in order to earn good marks.

Difference #4 – Your focus needs to be narrow and deep.

In your assignments, you were likely encouraged to take a broad, interconnected, high-level view of the theory and connect as many different ideas and concepts as possible. In your dissertation, however, you typically need to narrow your focus and go deep into one particular topic. Think about the research question we looked at earlier:

The focus is intentionally very narrow – specifically the focus is on:

• The UK only – no other countries are being considered.
• Life insurance brokers only – not financial services, not vehicle insurance, not medical insurance, etc.
• Customer trust only – not reputation, not customer loyalty, not employee trust, supplier trust, etc.

By keeping the focus narrow, you enable yourself to deeply probe whichever topic you choose – and this depth is essential for earning good marks. Importantly, ringfencing your focus doesn’t mean ignoring the connections to other topics – you should still acknowledge all the linkages, but don’t get distracted – stay focused on the research question(s).

So, as you can see, a dissertation is more than just an extended assignment or essay. It’s a unique research project that you (and only you) must lead from start to finish. The good news is that, if done right, completing your dissertation will equip you with strong research skills, which you will most certainly use in the future, regardless of whether you follow an academic or professional path.

Wrapping up

Hopefully in this post, I’ve answered your key question, “what is a dissertation?”, at least at a big picture-level. To recap on the key points:

• A dissertation is simply a structured research project .
• It’s useful to view a dissertation as a process involving asking a question, undertaking research and then answering that question.
• First and foremost, your marker(s) will be assessing your research skills , so its essential that you focus on producing a rigorous, academically sound piece of work (as opposed to changing the world or making a scientific breakthrough).
• While there are similarities, a dissertation is different from assignments and essays in multiple ways. It’s important to understand these differences if you want to produce a quality dissertation.

In this post, I’ve gently touched on some of the intricacies of the dissertation, including research questions, data types and research methodologies. Be sure to check out the Grad Coach Blog  for more detailed discussion of these areas.

34 Comments

Hello Derek

Yes, I struggle with literature review and am highly frustrated (with myself).

Thank you for the guide that you have sent, especially the apps. I am working through the guide and busy with the implementation of it.

Hope to hear from you again!

Regards Micheal

Great to hear that, Michael. All the best with your research!

Thank you. That was quite something to move forward with. Despite the fact that I was lost. I will now be able to do something with the information given.

That’s great, Pheladi. Good luck!

Thank you so much for your videos and writing research proposal and dissertation. These videos are useful. I was struggling, but now I am starting to write. I hope to watch your more videos to learn more about the dissertation.

Before this post, I didn’t know where to start my research, today I have some light and do certain % of my research. I may need for direction on literature review. Big thanks to you.

Very very good Derek

Thanks immensely Derek

You’re welcome 🙂 Good luck with your dissertation/thesis.

Thank you Derek for widening my scope on research, this can be likened to a blind man whose eyes can now see.

Remain bless sir🙏

You guys are doing really great… I am extremely grateful for your help… Keep going.. Please activate that research help for indian students as well I couldn’t access it being an indian.

Hello Derek,

I got stuck in the concept paper because I changed my topic. Now I don’t know where to pick up the pieces again. How can I focus and stay on track. I am getting scared.

Thank you so much Derek, I am a new comer, learning for the first time how to write a good research. These in information’s to me is a mind opener, I hope to learn more from you in the future, Thanks and God bless.

Thanks Guys this means so much to me

A pretty good and insightful piece for beginners like me. Looking forward to more helpful hints and guide. Thanks to Derek.

This is so helpful…really appreciate your work.

Great to hear that

On cybersecurity Analytics research to banking transactions

This was of great help to me and quite informative .

Thank you so much GradCoach,

This is like a light at the end of the tunnel. You are a lifesaver. Thank you once again.

hello, I’m so grateful for such great information. It appears basic, but it is so relevant in understanding the research process.

Your website is very helpful for writing thesis. A big well done to the team. Do you have a website for paper writing and academic publishing or how to publish my thesis, how to land a fully funded PhD, etc. Just the general upward trajectory in the academia. Thank you

I have learned a lot from the lectures, it was beneficial and helped me a lot in my research journey. Thank you very much

Thank you for your gifts of enlightenment to a person like me who’s always a student. May your ‘well’not dry out.

It’s quite a fun and superb, now I have come to believe that the way one teach can have an impact in understanding and can change one’s assumption and position about a subject or a problem, before I came here and learn I consider research methodology a hard thing because, I wasn’t taught by a mentor like this one. Thanks so much who ever have make this effort to make this something easy and engaging

I can’t imagine that world has achieved major aspects of every field of study

Thank you very much for all the valuable, wonderful and comprehensive amount of information… I highly appreciate your support, 100% I recommend you

This topic is intended for my MPhil. Work (The perception of parents on Technical and Vocational Education, the impact on educational policy). May you consider the suitability of the topic for me and refine if the need be. Thank you,

Hello here…

i have gone through the notes and it is interesting. All i need now is a pdf file that contain a whole dissertation writing inclusive of chapter 1 to 5 on motivation as a topic… thanks

Remarkable!!! You made it sound so simple

I got stuck in my writing because I need to change my topic. I am getting scared as I have a semester left 🙁

Thanks for such an educational opportunity and support

Thanks for your educational opportunity and support

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

Thesis vs. Dissertation: What’s the difference?

Thesis and dissertation are extensive research papers that differ in terms of their requirements, length, and purpose, with the former being associated with a master's degree and the latter with a doctoral degree, but are often used interchangeably.

Updated on September 15, 2023

A thesis and a dissertation are both extensive research papers, and both require literature searches and novel findings, but the two differ in various ways. Their definitions also differ across regions. Typically, in North America, a thesis is required for the completion of a master’s degree, while a dissertation is required for the completion of a doctoral degree. The former is long, while the latter is longer and more intensive.

Despite these differences, the two terms are often used interchangeably, especially among those who haven’t completed one or the other. Here, we’ll compare the components, length, and purpose of these two academic documents to clearly understand the differences between these important papers in the life of a graduate student.

What’s a thesis?

The term “thesis” explained here is generally consistent with how the word is used in North America to describe this substantive research paper.

A thesis is an extended argument (PDF). It is a research-based document that displays the student’s/author’s knowledge and understanding of a specific subject within their field of study. It generally presents findings on a particular topic. 

See this and this (PDFs) for examples. These superb master’s theses from Canada will give you an idea of the size and format of these papers.

Who would write a thesis?

You generally write a thesis if you’re undertaking a research-oriented master's degree program (as opposed to a practical program, which may require a capstone, internship, exam, etc.). 

The thesis is the essential part of a program’s research component, demonstrating the student's ability to critically analyze the literature and complete independent research. The process of writing a thesis involves exploring a specific research question, conducting a comprehensive literature review, collecting and analyzing data, and presenting findings in a structured and cohesive way.

A thesis' specific requirements and expectations differ depending on the academic institution, department, and program.

Components of a thesis

A thesis is typically presented in chapters. How many chapters will vary, but a common structure is:

• Introduction: Presents the research topic, purpose, and objectives, setting the context for the work.
• Literature review: Comprehensive survey of existing scholarly material related to the research topic, highlighting key theories and findings.
• Methodology: Describes the methods, procedures, and tools used in doing the research.
• Research: The actual performing of the study, collecting, and analyzing data relevant to the research question.
• Findings and conclusions: Gives the results obtained and explains their significance in relation to the research question.
• Limitations and future research: Outlines the study’s shortcomings and suggests potential areas for future investigation.

Within that structure, and in addition to those parts, a thesis may also include: 

• Cover page: Contains the thesis title, author's name, institution, department, date, and other relevant information
• Abstract : A brief summary of the thesis, highlighting the research objectives, methods, key findings, and conclusions.
• Certificates of own work
• Certificate of readiness to be included in the library
• Certificate that the research has not been presented to another university
• Acknowledgments
• Table of contents: List of the main sections, subsections, and corresponding page numbers.
• Index of figures and tables
• References: A comprehensive list of all the sources cited in the thesis, following a specific citation style (e.g., APA, MLA).
• Appendices (optional): Additional materials include:
• Abbreviations and/or acronyms used
• Questionnaire or interview schedule/s (if used)
• Data acquired in the form of transcripts or numeric tables
• Research protocol
• Ethics protocol

What’s a dissertation?

This is also viewed from a North American perspective, where a dissertation is usually the main research work toward completing a research-based doctoral program.

A dissertation is a comprehensive and in-depth research project completed as part of the requirements for a doctoral degree. It’s a substantial piece of original work that contributes new knowledge to a specific field of study.  Naturally, when it’s completed as the major requirement for earning a PhD, it’s longer, more detailed, and the expectations are higher.

Dissertations themselves can add to the literature in the field. For this reason, some students choose to publish them and have them indexed. The research and the data acquired while working on a dissertation can potentially lead to more publications and help define the researcher’s growing area of expertise.

See this and this (PDFs)  top-ranking dissertation on ProQuest for good examples.

Who would write a dissertation?

Completion and defense of a dissertation is a standard requirement for doctoral students to earn a PhD or another doctorate such as an EdD or DM. But some specialized degrees, such as a PsyD (Doctor of Psychology), JD (Juris Doctor) or DPT (Doctor of Physical Therapy) may have practice-based requirements in place of a research project, as these courses of study are geared more toward practical application.

Components of a dissertation

A dissertation’s components are generally the same as those of a thesis. You can look at the list above for a thesis to see what typically goes into a dissertation. But, if compared with a master’s thesis, most aspects are longer and more rigorous.

The word count requirements for theses can vary significantly, but doctoral dissertations often range 40,000–80,000 words or, per Harvard , 100–300 pages.

Differences between a thesis and a dissertation

As already touched on, the key differences are in where the two documents are used, length, and rigor. There are also regional differences.

A thesis typically demonstrates a master’s degree program student's grasp and presentation of a specific subject in their field of study. It normally involves a literature review, data analysis, and original research, but it is usually shorter and less comprehensive than a dissertation. The standards for rigor and novelty may also be lower.

A dissertation requires more extensive research, original contributions to the field, and a deeper exploration of the research topic. A dissertation is typically the output associated with a doctoral degree program.

The main differences in structure between a thesis and a dissertation are in the scope and complexity.

The word count requirement for theses and dissertations can vary depending on the institution and program.

A thesis is usually 20,000–40,000 words. However, there have been cases of mathematics dissertations that were only a few pages long!

Doctoral dissertations may range 60,000 to upward of 100,000 words, and exceed 100 pages. Many universities, however, seek around 80,000 words.

Oversight and process

A thesis may simply be submitted to the student's instructor, though rigorous thesis programs require a committee and defense. A dissertation will nearly always require the student to choose a chair, a committee, and then go through a more rigorous defense and revision (if necessary).

• Committee: Master's thesis committees usually have fewer members (typically 2–3) than doctoral dissertation committees (often 4–5, or even more).
• Guidance: Master's students often receive more detailed direction from advisers than doctoral students, who are expected to work more independently.
• Review: Dissertation reviews are typically more rigorous, often involving external reviewers, while thesis reviews are usually internal.
• Defense: A dissertation defense is generally more intense and formal, as it often involves a presentation to the wider academic community, while a thesis defense might be more confined and informal.
• Revision: The revision process for a doctoral dissertation is typically more extensive, given the larger scope of the project and higher stakes involved, compared with those for a master's thesis.

Regional differences

The terms' use varies among (and even within) countries. Here are some general regional differences:

In the United Kingdom, a thesis is commonly associated with both master's and doctoral degree programs. For example, the University College London  refers to a thesis for EngD, MPhil, MD(Res), and PhD degrees. At the University of Nottingham , a dissertation is written for a research master’s degree.

In Australia and New Zealand , “thesis” is generally used to refer to a substantial research project completed for a higher degree, though not limited to a master’s (you’ll find ample references to a “PhD thesis”).

In Latin American countries,  the thesis is commonly used to refer to both master's and doctoral research projects.

Closing thoughts

Both theses and dissertations are necessary documents for students in graduate programs. Despite the differences in expectations, and even in definitions of these papers, the student-author must do a diligent and rigorous job to earn their degree.

Here are a few helpful resources if you want to get into greater detail:

• Writing the Winning Thesis or Dissertation: A Step-By-Step Guide
• 100 PhD rules of the game to successfully complete a doctoral dissertation (PDF)
• Theses and Dissertations: A Guide to Writing in Social and Physical Sciences

Perfect the English on your thesis or dissertation

Whether you’re submitting a thesis or a dissertation, if it’s in English, it should:

• Have no grammatical or spelling mistakes
• Use field-appropriate language
• Concisely and clearly communicate your research.

That’s what AJE expert editors will do for you. Within days, you can receive an expert English edit of your work. The editor will be familiar with your field of study and will comprehensively improve both the language quality and the delivery of your message. Look into AJE English Editing .

The AJE Team

See our "Privacy Policy"

AJE will edit your thesis or dissertation

Choose between our expert academic editing services to prepare your thesis or dissertation.

• 1-888-SNU-GRAD
• Daytime Classes

The Top 3 Types of Dissertation Research Explained

Preparing for your doctoral dissertation takes serious perseverance. You’ve endured years of studies and professional development to get to this point. After sleepless nights and labor-intensive research, you’re ready to present the culmination of all of your hard work. Even with a strong base knowledge, it can be difficult — even daunting — to decide how you will begin writing.

By taking a wide-lens view of the dissertation research process , you can best assess the work you have ahead of you and any gaps in your current research strategy. Subsequently, you’ll begin to develop a timeline so you can work efficiently and cross that finish line with your degree in hand.

What Is a Dissertation?

A dissertation is a published piece of research on a novel topic in your chosen field. Students complete a dissertation as part of a doctoral or PhD program. For most students, a dissertation is the first substantive piece of academic research they will write. 

Because a dissertation becomes a published piece of academic literature that other academics may cite, students must defend it in front of a board of experts consisting of peers in their field, including professors, their advisor, and other industry experts. 

For many students, a dissertation is the first piece of research in a long career full of research. As such, it’s important to choose a topic that’s interesting and engaging.

Types of Dissertation Research

Dissertations can take on many forms, based on research and methods of presentation in front of a committee board of academics and experts in the field. Here, we’ll focus on the three main types of dissertation research to get you one step closer to earning your doctoral degree.

1. Qualitative

The first type of dissertation is known as a qualitative dissertation . A qualitative dissertation mirrors the qualitative research that a doctoral candidate would conduct throughout their studies. This type of research relies on non-numbers-based data collected through things like interviews, focus groups and participant observation. 

The decision to model your dissertation research according to the qualitative method will depend largely on the data itself that you are collecting. For example, dissertation research in the field of education or psychology may lend itself to a qualitative approach, depending on the essence of research. Within a qualitative dissertation research model, a candidate may pursue one or more of the following:

• Case study research
• Autoethnographies
• Narrative research 
• Grounded theory 

Although individual approaches may vary, qualitative dissertations usually include certain foundational characteristics. For example, the type of research conducted to develop a qualitative dissertation often follows an emergent design, meaning that the content and research strategy changes over time. Candidates also rely on research paradigms to further strategize how best to collect and relay their findings. These include critical theory, constructivism and interpretivism, to name a few. 

Because qualitative researchers integrate non-numerical data, their methods of collection often include unstructured interview, focus groups and participant observations. Of course, researchers still need rubrics from which to assess the quality of their findings, even though they won’t be numbers-based. To do so, they subject the data collected to the following criteria: dependability, transferability and validity. 

When it comes time to present their findings, doctoral candidates who produce qualitative dissertation research have several options. Some choose to include case studies, personal findings, narratives, observations and abstracts. Their presentation focuses on theoretical insights based on relevant data points. 

2. Quantitative

Quantitative dissertation research, on the other hand, focuses on the numbers. Candidates employ quantitative research methods to aggregate data that can be easily categorized and analyzed. In addition to traditional statistical analysis, quantitative research also hones specific research strategy based on the type of research questions. Quantitative candidates may also employ theory-driven research, replication-based studies and data-driven dissertations. 

When conducting research, some candidates who rely on quantitative measures focus their work on testing existing theories, while others create an original approach. To refine their approach, quantitative researchers focus on positivist or post-positivist research paradigms. Quantitative research designs focus on descriptive, experimental or relationship-based designs, to name a few. 

To collect the data itself, researchers focus on questionnaires and surveys, structured interviews and observations, data sets and laboratory-based methods. Then, once it’s time to assess the quality of the data, quantitative researchers measure their results against a set of criteria, including: reliability, internal/external validity and construct validity. Quantitative researchers have options when presenting their findings. Candidates convey their results using graphs, data, tables and analytical statements.

3. Mixed-Method

Many PhD candidates also use a hybrid model in which they employ both qualitative and quantitative methods of research. Mixed dissertation research models are fairly new and gaining traction. For a variety of reasons, a mixed-method approach offers candidates both versatility and credibility. It’s a more comprehensive strategy that allows for a wider capture of data with a wide range of presentation optimization. 

In the most common cases, candidates will first use quantitative methods to collect and categorize their data. Then, they’ll rely on qualitative methods to analyze that data and draw meaningful conclusions to relay to their committee panel. 

With a mixed-method approach, although you’re able to collect and analyze a more broad range of data, you run the risk of widening the scope of your dissertation research so much that you’re not able to reach succinct, sustainable conclusions. This is where it becomes critical to outline your research goals and strategy early on in the dissertation process so that the techniques you use to capture data have been thoroughly examined. 

How to Choose a Type of Dissertation Research That’s Right for You

After this overview of application and function, you may still be wondering how to go about choosing a dissertation type that’s right for you and your research proposition. In doing so, you’ll have a couple of things to consider: 

• What are your personal motivations? 
• What are your academic goals? 

It’s important to discern exactly what you hope to get out of your doctoral program . Of course, the presentation of your dissertation is, formally speaking, the pinnacle of your research. However, doctoral candidates must also consider:

• Which contributions they will make to the field
• Who they hope to collaborate with throughout their studies
• What they hope to take away from the experience personally, professionally and academically

Personal Considerations

To discern which type of dissertation research to choose, you have to take a closer look at your learning style, work ethic and even your personality. 

Quantitative research tends to be sequential and patterned-oriented. Steps move in a logical order, so it becomes clear what the next step should be at all times. For most candidates, this makes it easier to devise a timeline and stay on track. It also keeps you from getting overwhelmed by the magnitude of research involved. You’ll be able to assess your progress and make simple adjustments to stay on target. 

On the other hand, maybe you know that your research will involve many interviews and focus groups. You anticipate that you’ll have to coordinate participants’ schedules, and this will require some flexibility. Instead of creating a rigid schedule from the get-go, allowing your research to flow in a non-linear fashion may actually help you accomplish tasks more efficiently, albeit out of order. This also allows you the personal versatility of rerouting research strategy as you collect new data that leads you down other paths. 

After examining the research you need to conduct, consider more broadly: What type of student and researcher are you? In other words, What motivates you to do your best work? 

You’ll need to make sure that your methodology is conducive to the data you’re collecting, and you also need to make sure that it aligns with your work ethic so you set yourself up for success. If jumping from one task to another will cause you extra stress, but planning ahead puts you at ease, a quantitative research method may be best, assuming the type of research allows for this. 

Professional Considerations

The skills you master while working on your dissertation will serve you well beyond the day you earn your degree. Take into account the skills you’d like to develop for your academic and professional future. In addition to the hard skills you will develop in your area of expertise, you’ll also develop soft skills that are transferable to nearly any professional or academic setting. Perhaps you want to hone your ability to strategize a timeline, gather data efficiently or draw clear conclusions about the significance of your data collection. 

If you have considerable experience with quantitative analysis, but lack an extensive qualitative research portfolio, now may be your opportunity to explore — as long as you’re willing to put in the legwork to refine your skills or work closely with your mentor to develop a strategy together. 

Academic Considerations

For many doctoral candidates who hope to pursue a professional career in the world of academia, writing your dissertation is a practice in developing general research strategies that can be applied to any academic project. 

Candidates who are unsure which dissertation type best suits their research should consider whether they will take a philosophical or theoretical approach or come up with a thesis that addresses a specific problem or idea. Narrowing down this approach can sometimes happen even before the research begins. Other times, candidates begin to refine their methods once the data begins to tell a more concrete story.

Next Step: Structuring Your Dissertation Research Schedule

Once you’ve chosen which type of dissertation research you’ll pursue, you’ve already crossed the first hurdle. The next hurdle becomes when and where to fit dedicated research time and visits with your mentor into your schedule. The busyness of day-to-day life shouldn’t prevent you from making your academic dream a reality. In fact, search for programs that assist, not impede, your path to higher levels of academic success. 

Find out more about SNU’s online and on-campus education opportunities so that no matter where you are in life, you can choose the path that’s right for you.

Want to learn more about SNU's programs?

Request more information.

Have questions about SNU, our program, or how we can help you succeed. Fill out the form and an enrollment counselor will reach out to you soon!

Subscribe to the SNU blog for inspirational articles and tips to support you on your journey back to school.

Recent blog articles.

Adult Education

Discover Southern Nazarene University's Graduate Programs in Business

How Passion & Dedication Pave the Way for Success in Special Education

How an Instructional Design Degree Helps You Shape the Future of Education

Change Lives with a Degree in Family Studies & Gerontology

Have questions about SNU or need help determining which program is the right fit? Fill out the form and an enrollment counselor will follow-up to answer your questions!

Text With an Enrollment Counselor

Have questions, but want a faster response?  Fill out the form and one of our enrollment counselors will follow-up via text shortly!

Log in or Sign up

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser .

Doctoral Applied Research Project vs Dissertation

Discussion in ' General Distance Learning Discussions ' started by fritzy202 , Sep 8, 2012 .

fritzy202 New Member

Hi All, Ok, so once again I'm thinking about completing my doctoral degree. I think it is money wasted at my age, but I can't help but think I can do this and I want to prove to myself that I really can. I really don't like writing big papers and I'm not a huge fan of research just for the sake of writing a paper so the dissertation doesn't sound appealing and a few people I know that just completed theirs said they would never do it over again, it wasn't worth it. I teach at a community college, but would like to teach at a university, on the side. I have my MHA which when I started it was a terminal degree. Now U of P and a few other schools have come out with their DHA. I really don't want to get into administration which is the only benefit of a doctorate where I am, but I think I might have a hard time at the university level without it. I have found two programs at AT Still that seem reasonable to me, but one is a traditional dissertation and the other is an applied research project. Has anyone been through these programs or similar to know what the difference is? If I can do a project such as create a new program of study feasability study and write the new program or something similar I would do that in a heartbeat. That I would like. I don't mind research for something meaningful or useful that I can apply. That is why the project is appealing to me. Any thoughts about the difference? Would it be worthwhile to pursue if I only want it to add some part-time DL teaching? Could I teach with my MHA, healthcare experience and 12 yrs teaching experience at the university level? As much as I would like to prove to myself I can do it, my current student loan debt is high from the last 2 yrs so if I can teach without adding to it that would be best. Thanks for the thoughts and suggestions!  

Randell1234 Moderator

Can't really answer your questions but I can tell you that Nova has a Doctor of Health Science or something like that.  

AV8R Active Member

Valdosta State University's DPA requires a project instead of a dissertation too, whatever that means. Anyone know about the requirements of these "projects?" I've always thought it interesting that many of the newer medical doctorates don't require any dissertation at all. I recently looked at online doctorates for those who already have master's degrees in nursing (DPA) and physical therapy (DPT). Both programs only required the completion of 36 hours of additional course work. That's it. They're really little more than master's degrees. Holder's of these earned doctorates can then use their credentials to teach. Go figure.  

NMTTD Active Member

Comparison of Dissertation and Research Project A dissertation should: ~Summarize and integrate pertinent research and theory in its topic area. Review of related research should concentrate on work that has been published in the past five years. ~Make a contribution to knowledge in the topic area. For example, this can be done by: conceptualizing an issue or problem in a novel and useful manner; collecting new data through quantitative or qualitative research; demonstrating the applicability of a new method or treatment; synthesizing and interpreting existing data to gain new insights; or expanding the application of a theory or previous conclusions to a new area. ~Show how a topic area is illuminated, expanded, or changed by the development of a new perspective. A research project should: ~Embody a comprehensive instructional approach in which applied research interacts with real work business challenges. ~Demonstrate how grounded scholarly content is supportive of practitioner-researcher development. For example, this can be done by: extending the application of an existing process or theory; developing new applications for existing business theory; proposing counter arguments to existing theories or principles; or developing and demonstrating how improvements and cost-effectiveness can be integrated into existing business methods and procedures. ~Illustrate how exposure to applied research principles and techniques prepares business professionals to adapt and apply the skills of applied research in their profession.  

Delta Active Member

AV8R said: ↑ Holder's of these earned doctorates can then use their credentials to teach. Go figure. Click to expand...

Kizmet Moderator

I like NMTTD's unpacking of the distinction between the two types of doctoral degrees.  

Kizmet said: ↑ I like NMTTD's unpacking of the distinction between the two types of doctoral degrees. Click to expand...

BlueMason Audaces fortuna juvat

Delta said: ↑ Really? I think NMTTD provided a brilliant example of how students copy and paste today without giving credit! There is a word for that! Comparison of Dissertation and Research Project - Columbia Southern University Click to expand...

Delta said: ↑ You obviously didn't think this one through! Click to expand...

AV8R said: ↑ I think I thought it through just fine, thanks. I know exactly what they are. They are still doctorates that don't require any sort of dissertation, thesis, or what have you. I just find this to be interesting...that's all. Click to expand...

We're lucky that you're running all our posts through turnitin. What would we do without it? Delta said: ↑ Really? I think NMTTD provided a brilliant example of how students copy and paste today without giving credit! There is a word for that! Comparison of Dissertation and Research Project - Columbia Southern University Click to expand...

Kizmet said: ↑ We're lucky that you're running all our posts through turnitin. What would we do without it? Click to expand...

Okay, Mr. Delta. This thread is starting to degenerate into something not-so-nice. I always accept correction if it's done in a reasonable way but telling me to "get my facts straight!" and that I "didn't think this one through!" is probably a bit uncalled for. Just for the record, I double-checked the DNP program I originally referred to. You're right (sort of)...it does require the completion of a one-semester project, although I would hardly compare something like that to a dissertation that may take several years to complete.  

AV8R said: ↑ Okay, Mr. Delta. This thread is starting to degenerate into something not-so-nice. I always accept correction if it's done in a reasonable way but telling me to "get my facts straight!" and that I "didn't think this one through!" is probably a bit uncalled for. Just for the record, I double-checked the DNP program I originally referred to. You're right (sort of)...it does require the completion of a one-semester project, although I would hardly compare something like that to a dissertation that may take several years to complete. Click to expand...

Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

Let someone with an earned doctorate weigh in..... A dissertation builds upon the theoretical knowledge in one's academic discipline by either (a) bringing theory to data (deductive research) or (b) bringing data to theory (inductive research). In either case, the theoretical knowledge of one's discipline is advanced. This is the real basis of the Ph.D. (Of course, one hopes the theoretical advances will be used by practitioners to advance practice, too.) A doctoral "project" doesn't do those things. It instead allows the practitioner/candidate to demonstrate his/her ability to (a) identify a problem in practice, (b) develop methods to research said problem and (c) research the problem and offer solutions. The Ph.D. does all of this, too, but does it in the much more demanding arena of theoretical contribution. Admittedly, I didn't fully understand this when undertaking my Ph.D. I learned it somewhere else.  

SO sorry. Didnt realize I had to cite and reference my posts on an internet forum. I was unaware that the standards for posting here mirrored classroom discussion posts. I will keep this in mind next time.  

peacfulchaos2001 Member

NMTTD said: ↑ SO sorry. Didnt realize I had to cite and reference my posts on an internet forum. I was unaware that the standards for posting here mirrored classroom discussion posts. I will keep this in mind next time. Click to expand...

peacfulchaos2001 said: ↑ It wasn't as if you were trying to pass it off as something you had created (well not in my viewpoint). No disrespect, but to me it was clearly a copy and paste job. Click to expand...

NMTTD said: ↑ Exactly!! I assumed everyone would be able to tell it was copied and pasted. I absolutely wasn't trying to pass it off as mine. I have no idea about any of that kind of stuff. I mean, I'd love to get a doctorate, but I already know I don't have it in me. 1 or 2 masters degrees, but that's about it. Click to expand...

Share This Page

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

• Search titles only

Separate names with a comma.

• Search this thread only
• Display results as threads

Useful Searches

• Recent Posts

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to footer

Elite Editing

You write it. We right it.™

Dissertation vs. Thesis: Comparing the Two Academic Projects

In the academic world, students are often required to complete a research project such as a thesis or a dissertation in order to earn their degree. Depending on your field of study, you might need to submit—and then defend—a thesis or a dissertation before you can graduate.

Although these two academic research projects might seem interchangeable, there are key differences between the two. And understanding these differences is essential for both students and their academic institution.

Thesis and dissertation: definitions

A thesis is a formal paper that presents original research and findings on a particular topic. It is typically submitted as part of the requirements for a master’s degree, although some doctoral programs may also require a thesis. A thesis is usually shorter in length than a dissertation and focuses more on original research and findings.

Conversely, a dissertation is a longer, more comprehensive piece of research that is written as part of the requirements for a doctoral degree. Dissertations are usually around 100 to 300 pages in length—and they require a great deal of original research and analysis. Unlike a thesis, a dissertation is not just focused on presenting findings but also on offering new insights and contributions to the field. In fact, the requirements of each project are folded into their definitions.

What defines a thesis?

A thesis is often a requirement for a master’s degree. While it’s usually shorter and more focused than a dissertation, your thesis will be expected to demonstrate your mastery of the subject and your ability to conduct original research. On top of that, you’ll have to analyze your findings—and present an organized, thoughtful argument! Thesis projects typically involve the collection and analysis of data, as well as the presentation of the findings.

What defines a dissertation?

On the other hand, a dissertation is a longer piece of research that is written as part of the requirements for a doctoral degree. Students pursuing their PhD might need to submit a dissertation in order to graduate.

Similar to a thesis, a dissertation must demonstrate the student’s mastery of their chosen research subject. Additionally, a dissertation must show the student’s ability to conduct original research and their ability to contribute new insights and knowledge to the field. Dissertations usually involve a great deal of research, data collection, and analysis and are typically 100 to 300 pages in length. In other words, these are major projects that take a lot of time to complete!

Thesis vs dissertation: a comparison

Perhaps the biggest differences between a thesis and a dissertation are the length and scope of each project. Theses are shorter, laser-focused pieces of research that are typically submitted as part of a master’s degree. Conversely, dissertations are longer, more comprehensive pieces of research that are submitted as part of a doctoral degree.

Another key difference between the two projects is the level of original research and analysis that is expected and required of the student. Theses are expected to demonstrate the student’s ability to conduct original research and present their findings; dissertations are expected to not only present findings but also to offer new insights and contributions to the field.

In terms of the academic requirements, the difference between a thesis and a dissertation is largely based on the level of the degree being pursued. Master’s programs typically require a thesis, while doctoral programs require a dissertation. The specific requirements and expectations for each project will vary depending on the institution and academic field. In other words, the higher your degree, the more intensive your research project. Perhaps that’s why the dissertation is the longer of these two academic research projects.

What is the difference in length between the two?

Length is one of the most noticeable differences between a thesis and a dissertation. A thesis is typically shorter than a dissertation, with an average length of around 50 pages. On the other hand, a dissertation is a much longer piece of work, typically around 100–200 pages in length.

However, length isn’t the only difference between these two academic research projects. The purpose can be largely different too!

What is the difference in purpose between the two?

The purpose of a thesis and a dissertation will vary according to your field of study. However, here’s a look at the main purpose of each:

• A thesis summarizes the student’s research findings. It must demonstrate the student’s understanding of the subject and their ability to apply what they’ve learned in a practical way.
• A dissertation shows the student’s ability to conduct independent and original research. It’s a comprehensive piece of work that is meant to contribute new knowledge and insights to their field.

In other words, a thesis researches a topic, and a dissertation might add a new research source because it helps position you as a thought leader .

Completing your thesis or dissertation is a huge accomplishment. However you’re not done when you turn in your paper. You’ll need to defend your research before you can earn that degree.

How is the defense different between the two?

The defense of a thesis and a dissertation is another difference between the two projects; however, it’s common for both projects to have an oral dissertation. In a thesis defense, the student is usually required to present their research and findings to a committee of professors within the institution. After the presentation, the committee will ask the student questions about their research and their findings. If the student demonstrates their mastery of the subject, there’s a good chance they’ll pass with flying colors!

Dissertation defense is more intensive—and more intimidating for the student. Your institution might assemble a committee of professors, peers, and other experts in your field. The committee will ask difficult questions to ensure that you not only have a firm grasp of the topic but have a well-developed argument with evidence to support your dissertation’s conclusion.

Regardless of whether you’re defending a thesis or a dissertation, you’ll probably have the moral support of your academic advisor in the room with you. A student’s advisor is with them every step of the way throughout the project, so it’s helpful and comforting when they attend the defense!

Perfect your dissertation or thesis with professional proofreading

The academic world is fun—but it’s also extremely challenging! As you write your thesis or dissertation, you might need a little professional assistance to proofread it. You’ve poured your heart and soul into this project, so make sure it’s perfectly proofread and ready for your defense committee!

Elite Editing offers proofreading services for students, businesses, and individuals. Visit our website to learn more!

Other Resources You Might Like

Crafting Timeless Content

Mastering the Art of Persuasive White Papers

Writing Effective Press Releases in a Digital Age

Get elite updates straight to your inbox..

• Content Writing
• Marketing and Sales Enablement
• Program Management
• AI Implementation

Who We Help

• Thought Leaders
• Cybersecurity
• Health Care
• Full-Time Careers
• Freelance Opportunities
• Press and Awards
• Success Stories
• About Elite

In the News

• Elite Creative Makes the Inc. 5000 for the Third Year in a Row

LET US HELP

Welcome to Capella

Select your program and we'll help guide you through important information as you prepare for the application process.

FIND YOUR PROGRAM

Connect with us

A team of dedicated enrollment counselors is standing by, ready to answer your questions and help you get started.

• Capella University Blog
• PhD/Doctorate

The difference between a dissertation and doctoral capstone

May 30, 2023

Estimated reading time:  3-4 minutes

If you’ve been researching doctoral degrees, you may notice that virtually all PhD programs require a dissertation, while some professional doctorates require a doctoral capstone or an alternative doctoral project.

So, what’s the difference between the two?

What do a dissertation and doctoral capstone have in common?

All doctoral programs help prepare students to contribute evidence-based practice in their field. Students learn to apply leadership principles and strategies that promote community support, diversity and individuality in the workplace, and the community.

Completing either a dissertation or a doctoral capstone requires intense preparation and a strong foundation in writing and critical thinking. Both culminate in a final document or project that demonstrates a broadened knowledge of relevant theory and practice. 

What are the main differences between a dissertation and a doctoral capstone? 

The Capella doctoral experience offers a good comparison of the two types of final project.

The Capella dissertation is a traditional five-chapter research document that you’ll develop as you work with a faculty mentor and dissertation committee members. It’s meant to be a work of high-quality academic research that contributes to your field of study.

The doctoral capstone can take many different forms depending on your program, your specialization or area of interest within your subject and other variables. Working with a faculty mentor and committee, you’ll complete a project that offers solutions or improvements to a real-world problem relevant to your field of study. 

• Project focus
• Project deliverable
• Deliverable detail

Doctoral Capstone

• Extends or applies research to solve a real-world problem
• Provides a solution to a problem within a specific organizational setting
• Presents the results in a deliverable (paper, product, or portfolio) and a final report that describes the creation of the deliverable

Dissertation

• Involves a quest for new knowledge to solve a real-world problem
• Addresses a research problem in one field of specialization
• Involves either quantitative or qualitative research methods
• Paper, Product or Portfolio
• Action research
• Clinical Research Paper
• Program Curriculum
• Change Management Plan
• Chapter 1. Introduction and Statement of the Problem
• Chapter 2. Literature Review
• Chapter 3. Methodology
• Chapter 4. Data Analysis and Results
• Chapter 5. Conclusions and Recommendations

Ready to explore the doctoral path that could work best for you? Capella University offers PhD and professional doctorate degree programs ranging from business and education to health care and technology.

Learn more about Capella’s online doctoral programs.

You may also like

Can I transfer credits into a doctoral program?

January 8, 2020

What are the steps in writing a dissertation?

December 11, 2019

What you need to know about paying for your doctorate

November 11, 2019

Start learning today

Get started on your journey now by connecting with an enrollment counselor. See how Capella may be a good fit for you, and start the application process.

Please Exit Private Browsing Mode

Your internet browser is in private browsing mode. Please turn off private browsing mode if you wish to use this site.

Are you sure you want to cancel?

Basic vs. applied research: what’s the difference?

Last updated

27 February 2023

Reviewed by

Cathy Heath

Short on time? Get an AI generated summary of this article instead

Research can be used to learn new facts, create new products, and solve various problems. Yet, there are different ways to undertake research to meet a desired goal. 

The method you choose to conduct research will most likely be based on what question you want to answer, plus other factors that will help you accurately get the answer you need. 

Research falls into two main categories: basic research and applied research. Both types of research have distinct purposes and varied benefits. 

This guide will help you understand the differences and similarities between basic and applied research and how they're used. It also answers common questions about the two types of research, including:

Why is it called basic research?

What is more important, basic research or applied research?

What are examples of pure (basic) research and applied research?

Analyze basic and applied research

Dovetail streamlines analysis to help you uncover and share actionable insights

• What is basic research?

Basic research (sometimes called fundamental or pure) advances scientific knowledge to completely understand a subject, topic, or phenomenon. It's conducted to satisfy curiosity or develop a full body of knowledge on a specific subject.

Basic research is used to bring about a fundamental understanding of the world, different behaviors, and is the foundation of knowledge in the scientific disciplines. It is usually conducted based on developing and testing theories.

While there is no apparent commercial value to the discoveries that result from basic research, it is the foundation of research used for other projects like developing solutions to solve problems. 

Examples of basic research

Basic research has always been used to give humans a better understanding of all branches of science and knowledge. However, it's not specifically based on identifying new things about the universe.

Basic research has a wide range of uses, as shown in the following examples:

Investigation into how the universe began

A study searching for the causes of cancer

Understanding the components that make up human DNA

An examination into whether a vegetarian diet is healthier than one with meat

A study to learn more about which areas in the world get the most precipitation

Benefits of conducting basic research

Called basic research because it is performed without an immediate or obvious benefit, this type of research often leads to vital solutions in the future. While basic research isn't technically solution-driven, it develops the underlying knowledge used for additional learning and research. 

There are many benefits derived from basic research, including:

Gaining an understanding of living systems and the environment

Gathering information that can help society prepare for the future

Expanding knowledge that can lead to medical advances

Providing a foundation for applied research

• What is applied research?

Applied research studies particular circumstances to apply the information to real-life situations. It helps improve the human condition by finding practical solutions for existing problems.

Applied research builds off facts derived from basic research and other data to address challenges in all facets of life. Instead of exploring theories of the unknown, applied research requires researchers to use existing knowledge, facts, and discoveries to generate new knowledge. 

Solutions derived from applied research are used in situations ranging from medical treatments or product development to new laws or regulations.

Examples of applied research

Applied research is designed to solve practical problems that exist under current conditions. However, it's not only used for consumer-based products and decisions.

Applied research can be used in a variety of ways, as illustrated by the following examples:

The investigation of ways to improve agricultural crop production

A study to improve methods to market products for Gen Z consumers

Examination of how technology can t make car tires last longer

Exploration of how to cook healthy meals with a limited budget

A study on how to treat patients with insomnia

Benefits of using applied research

Although applied research expands upon a foundation of existing knowledge, it also brings about new ideas. Applied research provides many benefits in various circumstances, including:

Designing new products and services

Creating new objectives

Providing unbiased data through the testing of verifiable evidence

• Basic research vs. applied research: the differences

Both basic and applied research are tactics for discovering specific information. However, they differ significantly in the way research is conducted and the objectives they achieve. 

Some of the most notable differences between basic and applied research include the following:

Research outcomes: curiosity-driven vs. solution-driven

Basic research is generally conducted to learn more about a specific subject. It is usually self-initiated to gain knowledge to satisfy curiosity or confirm a theory. 

Conversely, applied knowledge is directed toward finding a solution to a specific problem. It is often conducted to assist a client in improving products, services, or issues.

Research scope: universal scope vs. specific scope

Basic research uses a broad scope to apply various concepts to gain more knowledge. Research methods may include studying different subjects to add more information that connects evidence points in a greater body of data.

Meanwhile, applied research depends on a specific or narrow scope to gather specific evidence to address a certain problem.

Research approaches: expanding existing knowledge vs. finding new knowledge

Researchers conduct basic research to fill in gaps between existing information points. Basic knowledge is an expansion of existing knowledge to gain a deeper understanding. It is often based on how, what, or why something is the way it is. Although applied research may be based on information derived from basic research, it's not designed to expand the knowledge. Instead, the research is conducted to find new knowledge, usually in the form of a solution.

Research commercialization: Informational vs. commercial gain

The main basis of product development is to solve a problem for consumers.

Basic research might lead to solutions and commercial products in the future to help with this. Since applied research is used to develop solutions, it's often used for commercial gain.

Theory formulation: theoretical vs. practical nature

Basic research is usually based on a theory about a specific subject. Researchers may develop a theory that grows and changes as more information is discovered during the research process. Conversely, applied research is practical in nature since the goal is to solve a specific problem.

• Are there similarities between applied and basic research?

While some obvious differences exist, applied and basic research methods have similarities. For example, researchers may use the same methods to collect data (like interviews, surveys , and focus groups ) for both types of research. 

Both types of research require researchers to use inductive and deductive reasoning to develop and prove hypotheses . The two types of research frequently intersect when basic research serves as the foundation for applied research.

While applied research is solution-based, basic research is equally important because it yields information used to develop solutions to many types of problems. 

• Methods used in basic research and applied research

While basic and applied research have different approaches and goals, they require researchers or scientists to gather data. Basic and applied research makes use of many of the same methods to gather and study information, including the following:

Observations: Studying research subjects for an extended time allows researchers to gather information about how subjects behave under different conditions.

Interviews: Surveys and one-to-one discussions help researchers gain information from other subjects and validate data.

Experiments: Researchers conduct experiments to prove or disprove certain hypotheses based on information that has been gathered.

Questionnaires: A series of questions related to the research context helps researchers gather quantitative information applicable to both basic and applied research.

• How do you determine when to use basic research vs. applied research?

Basic and applied research are both helpful in obtaining knowledge. However, they aren't usually used in the same settings or under the same circumstances. 

When you're trying to determine which type of research to use for a particular project, it's essential to consider your product goals. Basic research seeks answers to universal, theoretical questions. While it works to uncover specific knowledge, it's generally not used to develop a solution. Conversely, applied research discovers answers to specific questions. It should be used to find out new knowledge to solve a problem.

• Bottom line

Both basic and applied research are methods used to gather information and analyze facts that help build knowledge around a subject. However, basic research is used to gain understanding and satisfy curiosity, while applied research is used to solve specific problems. Both types of research depend on gathering information to prove a hypothesis or create a product, service, or valuable process. 

By learning more about the similarities and differences between basic and applied research, you'll be prepared to gather and use data efficiently to meet your needs.

Should you be using a customer insights hub?

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 18 April 2023

Last updated: 27 February 2023

Last updated: 6 February 2023

Last updated: 6 October 2023

Last updated: 5 February 2023

Last updated: 16 April 2023

Last updated: 9 March 2023

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 4 July 2024

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next.

Users report unexpectedly high data usage, especially during streaming sessions.

Users find it hard to navigate from the home page to relevant playlists in the app.

It would be great to have a sleep timer feature, especially for bedtime listening.

I need better filters to find the songs or artists I’m looking for.

Log in or sign up

Get started for free

What is Applied Research? Definition, Types, Examples

Appinio Research · 10.01.2024 · 36min read

Ever wondered how groundbreaking solutions to real-world challenges are developed, or how innovations come to life? Applied research holds the key. In this guide, we will delve deep into the world of applied research, uncovering its principles, methodologies, and real-world impact.  From harnessing cutting-edge technology to address healthcare crises to revolutionizing industries through data-driven insights, we'll explore the diverse domains where applied research thrives.

What is Applied Research?

Applied research is a systematic and organized inquiry aimed at solving specific real-world problems or improving existing practices, products, or services. Unlike basic research, which focuses on expanding general knowledge, applied research is all about using existing knowledge to address practical issues.

The primary purpose of applied research is to generate actionable insights and solutions that have a direct impact on practical situations. It seeks to bridge the gap between theory and practice by taking existing knowledge and applying it in real-world contexts. Applied research is driven by the need to address specific challenges, make informed decisions, and drive innovation in various domains.

Importance of Applied Research

Applied research holds immense significance across various fields and industries. Here's a list of reasons why applied research is crucial:

• Problem Solving:  Applied research provides effective solutions to real-world problems, improving processes, products, and services.
• Innovation:  It drives innovation by identifying opportunities for enhancement and developing practical solutions.
• Evidence-Based Decision-Making:  Policymakers and decision-makers rely on applied research findings to make informed choices and shape effective policies.
• Competitive Advantage:  In business, applied research can lead to improved products, increased efficiency, and a competitive edge in the market.
• Social Impact:  Applied research contributes to solving societal issues, from healthcare improvements to environmental sustainability.
• Technological Advancement:  In technology and engineering, it fuels advancements by applying scientific knowledge to practical applications.

Applied Research vs. Basic Research

Applied research differs from basic research in several key ways:

• Objectives:  Applied research aims to address specific practical problems or improve existing processes, while basic research seeks to expand general knowledge.
• Focus:  Applied research focuses on solving real-world challenges, whereas basic research explores fundamental principles and concepts.
• Applicability:  Applied research findings are directly applicable to practical situations, while basic research often lacks immediate practical applications.
• Immediate Impact:  Applied research has a more immediate impact on solving problems and improving practices, whereas basic research may have longer-term or indirect effects on knowledge and innovation.
• Research Questions:  Applied research formulates research questions related to practical issues, while basic research poses questions to explore theoretical or fundamental concepts.

Understanding these distinctions is essential for researchers, policymakers, and stakeholders in various fields, as it guides the choice of research approach and the expected outcomes of a research endeavor.

Types of Applied Research

Applied research encompasses various types, each tailored to specific objectives and domains. Understanding these types is essential for choosing the right approach to address real-world problems effectively. Here are some common types of applied research, each with its distinct focus and methodologies.

Evaluation Research

Purpose:  Evaluation research assesses the effectiveness, efficiency, and impact of programs, interventions, or policies. It aims to determine whether these initiatives meet their intended goals and objectives.

Methodology:  Researchers employ a range of quantitative and qualitative methods , including surveys, interviews, observations, and data analysis, to evaluate the outcomes and outcomes of programs or interventions.

Example:  Evaluating the impact of a public health campaign aimed at reducing smoking rates by analyzing pre- and post-campaign survey data on smoking habits and attitudes.

Action Research

Purpose:  Action research focuses on solving practical problems within a specific organizational or community context. It involves collaboration between researchers and practitioners to implement and assess solutions.

Methodology:  Action research is iterative and participatory, with researchers and stakeholders working together to identify problems, develop interventions, and assess their effectiveness. It often involves cycles of planning, action, reflection, and adjustment.

Example:  Teachers collaborating with researchers to improve classroom teaching methods and student outcomes by implementing and refining innovative teaching strategies.

Case Study Research

Purpose:   Case study research investigates a particular individual, organization, or situation in-depth to gain a comprehensive understanding of a specific phenomenon or issue.

Methodology:  Researchers collect and analyze a wealth of data, which may include interviews, documents, observations, and archival records. The goal is to provide a detailed and context-rich description of the case.

Example:  A detailed examination of a successful startup company's growth strategies and challenges, offering insights into factors contributing to its success.

Applied Experimental Research

Purpose:  Applied experimental research seeks to establish causal relationships between variables by manipulating one or more factors and observing their impact on outcomes. It helps determine cause-and-effect relationships in real-world settings.

Methodology:  Researchers conduct controlled experiments, similar to those in basic research, but within practical contexts. They manipulate variables and use statistical analysis to assess their effects on specific outcomes.

Example:  Testing the impact of different website designs on user engagement and conversion rates by randomly assigning visitors to various design versions and measuring their interactions.

Survey Research

Purpose:   Survey research involves collecting data from a sample of individuals or organizations to understand their opinions, attitudes, behaviors, or characteristics. It is commonly used to gather quantitative data on specific topics.

Methodology:  Researchers design surveys with carefully crafted questions and administer them to a representative sample of the target population . Statistical analysis is used to draw conclusions based on survey responses.

Example:  Conducting a national survey to assess public sentiment and preferences on environmental conservation initiatives and policies.

These types of applied research provide a framework for approaching real-world challenges systematically. Researchers can choose the most appropriate type based on their research goals, objectives, and the nature of the problem or phenomenon they seek to address. By selecting the right approach, applied researchers can generate valuable insights and practical solutions in various fields and disciplines.

How to Prepare for Applied Research?

In the preparatory phase of your applied research journey, you'll lay the groundwork for a successful study. This phase involves a series of crucial steps that will shape the direction and ethics of your research project.

Identifying Research Questions

One of the key starting points for any applied research endeavor is identifying the right research questions. Your research questions should be clear, specific, and directly related to the problem or issue you aim to address.

• Engage with Stakeholders:  Reach out to individuals or groups who are affected by or have an interest in the issue you're researching. Their perspectives can help you formulate relevant questions.
• Consider Feasibility:  Ensure that your research questions are feasible within your available resources, including time, budget, and access to data or participants.
• Prioritize Impact:  Focus on questions that have the potential to create meaningful change or provide valuable insights in your chosen field.

Formulating Hypotheses

Hypotheses serve as the guiding stars of your research, providing a clear direction for your investigation. Formulating hypotheses is a critical step that sets the stage for testing and validating your ideas.

• Testable Predictions:  Your hypotheses should be testable and capable of being proven or disproven through empirical research.
• Informed by Literature:  Base your hypotheses on existing knowledge and insights gained from the literature review. They should build upon what is already known and aim to expand that knowledge.
• Clarity and Precision:  Write your hypotheses in a clear and precise manner, specifying the expected relationship or outcome you intend to explore.

Literature Review

Conducting a thorough literature review is like embarking on a treasure hunt through existing knowledge in your field. It's a comprehensive exploration of what other researchers have already discovered and what gaps in knowledge still exist.

• Search Strategies:  Utilize academic databases, journals, books, and credible online sources to search for relevant literature.
• Analyze Existing Research:  Examine the findings, methodologies, and conclusions of previous studies related to your research topic.
• Identify Research Gaps:  Look for areas where current knowledge is insufficient or contradictory. These gaps will be the foundation for your own research.

Data Collection Methods

Selecting the proper data collection methods is crucial to gather the information needed to address your research questions. The choice of methods will depend on the nature of your research and the type of data you require.

• Quantitative vs. Qualitative:  Decide whether you will collect numerical data (quantitative) or focus on descriptive insights and narratives (qualitative).
• Survey Design :  If surveys are part of your data collection plan, carefully design questions that are clear, unbiased, and aligned with your research goals.
• Sampling Strategies:  Determine how you will select participants or data points to ensure representativeness and reliability.

Ethical Considerations

Ethical considerations are at the heart of responsible research. Ensuring that your study is conducted ethically and with integrity is paramount.

• Informed Consent:  Obtain informed consent from participants, ensuring they understand the purpose of the research, potential risks, and their right to withdraw at any time.
• Confidentiality:  Safeguard participants' personal information and ensure their anonymity when reporting findings.
• Minimizing Harm:  Take measures to mitigate any physical or emotional harm that participants may experience during the research process.
• Ethical Reporting:  Accurately represent your research findings, avoiding manipulation or selective reporting that may mislead readers or stakeholders.

By diligently addressing these aspects of research preparation, you are building a solid foundation for your applied research project, setting the stage for effective data collection and meaningful analysis in the subsequent phases of your study.

How to Design Your Research Study?

When it comes to applied research, the design of your study is paramount. It shapes the entire research process, from data collection to analysis and interpretation. In this section, we will explore the various elements that make up the foundation of your research design.

Research Design Types

Your choice of research design is like selecting the blueprint for your research project. Different research design types offer unique advantages and are suited for different research questions. Here are some common research design types:

• Experimental Design :  In this design, researchers manipulate one or more variables to observe their impact on outcomes. It allows for causal inference but may not always be feasible in applied research due to ethical or practical constraints.
• Descriptive Design:  This design aims to describe a phenomenon or population without manipulating variables. It is often used when researchers want to provide a snapshot of a situation or gain insights into a specific context.
• Correlational Design :  In this design, researchers examine relationships between variables without manipulating them. It helps identify associations but does not establish causation.
• Longitudinal Design :   Longitudinal studies involve collecting data from the same subjects over an extended period. They are valuable for tracking changes or developments over time.
• Cross-Sectional Design :  This design involves data collection from a diverse group of subjects at a single point in time. It's helpful in studying differences or variations among groups.

Sampling Methods

Sampling methods determine who or what will be included in your study. The choice of sampling method has a significant impact on the generalizability of your findings. Here are some standard sampling methods:

• Random Sampling:  This method involves selecting participants or data points entirely at random from the population. It ensures every element has an equal chance of being included, which enhances representativeness .
• Stratified Sampling:  In stratified sampling, the population is divided into subgroups or strata, and then random samples are drawn from each stratum. This method ensures that each subgroup is adequately represented.
• Convenience Sampling:  Researchers choose subjects or data points that are readily available and accessible. While convenient, this method may lead to sampling bias as it may not accurately represent the entire population.
• Purposive Sampling:  In purposive sampling, researchers deliberately select specific individuals or groups based on their expertise, experience, or relevance to the research topic. It is often used when seeking specialized knowledge.

Data Collection Tools

Selecting the right data collection tools is essential to gather accurate and relevant information. Your choice of tools will depend on the research design and objectives. Standard data collection tools include:

• Questionnaires and Surveys:  These structured instruments use standardized questions to gather data from participants. They are suitable for collecting large amounts of quantitative data.
• Interviews:   Interviews can be structured, semi-structured, or unstructured. They provide an opportunity to gather in-depth, qualitative insights from participants.
• Observation:  Direct observation involves systematically watching and recording behaviors or events. It's valuable for studying behaviors or phenomena in their natural context.
• Secondary Data :  Researchers can also utilize existing data sources, such as government reports, databases, or historical records, for their research.

Variables and Measurement

Defining variables and choosing appropriate measurement methods is crucial for ensuring the reliability and validity of your research. Variables are characteristics, phenomena, or factors that can change or vary in your study. They can be categorized into:

• Independent Variables:  These are the variables you manipulate or control in your study to observe their effects on other variables.
• Dependent Variables:  These are the variables you measure to assess the impact of the independent variables.

Choosing the right measurement techniques, scales, or instruments is essential to accurately quantify variables and collect valid data. It's crucial to establish clear operational definitions for each variable to ensure consistency in measurement.

Data Analysis Techniques

Once you have collected your data, the next step is to analyze it effectively. Data analysis involves:

• Data Cleaning:  Removing any errors, inconsistencies, or outliers from your dataset to ensure data quality.
• Statistical Analysis :  Depending on your research design and data type, you may use various statistical techniques such as regression analysis , t-tests, ANOVA, or chi-square tests.
• Qualitative Analysis:  For qualitative data, techniques like thematic analysis, content analysis, or discourse analysis help uncover patterns and themes.
• Data Visualization:  Using graphs, charts, and visual representations to present your data effectively.

Chi-Square Calculator :

t-Test Calculator :

One-way ANOVA Calculator :

Selecting the appropriate analysis techniques depends on your research questions, data type, and objectives. Proper data analysis is crucial for drawing meaningful conclusions and insights from your research.

With a solid understanding of research design, sampling methods, data collection tools, variables, and measurement, you are well-equipped to embark on your applied research journey. These elements lay the groundwork for collecting valuable data and conducting meaningful analyses in the subsequent phases of your study.

How to Conduct Applied Research?

Now that you've prepared and designed your research study, it's time to delve into the practical aspects of conducting applied research. This phase involves the execution of your research plan, from collecting data to drawing meaningful conclusions. Let's explore the critical components in this stage.

Data Collection Phase

The data collection phase is where your research plan comes to life. It's a crucial step that requires precision and attention to detail to ensure the quality and reliability of your data.

• Implement Data Collection Methods:   Execute the data collection methods you've chosen, whether they involve surveys, interviews, observations, or the analysis of existing datasets.
• Maintain Consistency:  Ensure that data collection is carried out consistently according to your research design and protocols. Minimize any variations or deviations that may introduce bias .
• Document the Process:  Keep thorough records of the data collection process. Note any challenges, unexpected occurrences, or deviations from your original plan. Documentation is essential for transparency and replication.
• Quality Assurance:  Continuously monitor the quality of the data you collect. Check for errors, missing information, or outliers. Implement data validation and cleaning procedures to address any issues promptly.
• Participant Engagement:  If your research involves human participants, maintain open and respectful communication with them. Address any questions or concerns and ensure participants' comfort and willingness to participate.

Data Analysis Phase

Once you've collected your data, it's time to make sense of the information you've gathered. The data analysis phase involves transforming raw data into meaningful insights and patterns.

• Data Preparation:  Start by organizing and cleaning your data. This includes dealing with missing values, outliers, and ensuring data consistency.
• Selecting Analysis Methods:  Depending on your research design and data type, choose the appropriate statistical or qualitative analysis methods. Common techniques include regression analysis , content analysis, or thematic coding .
• Conducting Analysis:  Perform the chosen analysis systematically and according to established protocols. Ensure that your analysis is reproducible by documenting every step.
• Interpreting Results:  Interpretation involves making sense of your findings in the context of your research questions and hypotheses. Consider the statistical significance of the results and any practical implications they may have.
• Visualization:  Create visual representations of your data, such as graphs, charts, or tables, to convey your findings effectively. Visualizations make complex data more accessible to a broader audience.

Interpretation of Results

Interpreting research results is a critical step that bridges the gap between data analysis and drawing conclusions. This process involves making sense of the patterns and insights that emerge from your analysis.

• Relate to Hypotheses:  Determine whether your results support or refute your hypotheses. Be prepared to explain any unexpected findings.
• Contextualize Findings:  Consider the broader context in which your research takes place. How do your results fit into the larger body of knowledge in your field?
• Identify Patterns :  Highlight significant trends, correlations, or relationships you've uncovered. Discuss their practical implications and relevance.
• Acknowledge Limitations:  Be transparent about any limitations in your study that may affect the interpretation of results. This includes sample size, data quality, and potential biases.

Drawing Conclusions

Drawing conclusions is the ultimate goal of your research. It involves synthesizing your findings and answering the research questions you initially posed.

• Answer Research Questions:  Explicitly address the research questions you formulated at the beginning of your study. State whether your findings confirm or challenge your initial hypotheses.
• Highlight Insights:  Emphasize the key insights and contributions of your research. Discuss the practical implications of your findings and their relevance to the field.
• Recommend Actions:  Based on your conclusions, suggest practical steps, recommendations, or future research directions. How can your research contribute to addressing the problem or challenge you investigated?
• Consider Implications:  Reflect on the broader implications of your research for stakeholders, policymakers, or practitioners in your field.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

During the data collection, analysis, interpretation, and conclusion-drawing phases, it's essential to be aware of common pitfalls that can affect the quality and integrity of your research.

• Sampling Bias :  Ensure that your sample is representative of the population you intend to study. Address any bias that may have been introduced during data collection.
• Data Manipulation:  Avoid manipulating or selectively reporting data to fit preconceived notions. Maintain transparency in your analysis and reporting.
• Overinterpretation:  Be cautious of drawing overly broad conclusions based on limited data. Acknowledge the limitations of your study.
• Ignoring Ethical Considerations:  Continuously uphold ethical standards in your research, from data collection to reporting. Protect participants' rights and privacy.
• Lack of Validation:  Ensure that the methods and tools you use for data collection and analysis are valid and reliable. Validation helps establish the credibility of your findings.

By navigating the data collection, analysis, interpretation, and conclusion-drawing phases with care and attention to detail, you'll be well-prepared to confidently share your research findings and contribute to advancing knowledge in your field.

How to Report Applied Research Results?

Now that you've conducted your applied research and drawn meaningful conclusions, it's time to share your insights with the world. Effective reporting and communication are crucial to ensure that your research has a real impact and contributes to the broader knowledge base.

Writing Research Reports

Writing a comprehensive research report is the cornerstone of communicating your findings. It provides a detailed account of your research process, results, and conclusions. Here's what you need to consider:

Structure of a Research Report

• Title:  Create a concise, informative title that reflects the essence of your research.
• Abstract:  Summarize your research in a clear and concise manner, highlighting key objectives, methods, results, and conclusions.
• Introduction:  Provide an overview of your research topic, objectives, significance, and research questions.
• Literature Review:  Summarize relevant literature and identify gaps in existing knowledge that your research addresses.
• Methodology:  Describe your research design, sampling methods, data collection tools, and data analysis techniques.
• Results:  Present your findings using tables, charts, and narratives. Be transparent and objective in reporting your results.
• Discussion:  Interpret your results, discuss their implications, and relate them to your research questions and hypotheses.
• Conclusion:  Summarize your main findings, their significance, and the implications for future research or practical applications.
• References:  Cite all sources and studies you referenced in your report using a consistent citation style (e.g., APA, MLA).

Writing Tips

• Use clear and concise language, avoiding jargon or overly technical terms.
• Organize your report logically, with headings and subheadings for easy navigation.
• Provide evidence and data to support your claims and conclusions.
• Consider your target audience and tailor the report to their level of expertise and interest.

Creating Visualizations

Visualizations are powerful tools for conveying complex data and making your research findings more accessible. Here are some types of visualizations commonly used in research reports:

Charts and Graphs

• Bar Charts:  Ideal for comparing categories or groups.
• Line Charts:  Effective for showing trends or changes over time.
• Pie Charts:  Useful for displaying proportions or percentages.
• Data Tables:  Present numerical data in an organized format.
• Cross-tabulations:  Show relationships between variables.

Diagrams and Maps

• Flowcharts:  Visualize processes or workflows.
• Concept Maps:  Illustrate connections between concepts.
• Geographic Maps:  Display spatial data and patterns.

When creating visualizations:

• Choose the correct type of visualization for your data and research questions.
• Ensure that visualizations are labeled, clear, and easy to understand.
• Provide context and explanations to help readers interpret the visuals.

Presenting Your Research

Presenting your research to an audience is an opportunity to engage, educate, and inspire. Whether it's through a conference presentation, seminar, or webinar, effective communication is vital.

• Know Your Audience:  Tailor your presentation to the interests and expertise of your audience.
• Practice:  Rehearse your presentation to ensure a smooth delivery and confident demeanor.
• Use Visual Aids:  Enhance your presentation with visual aids such as slides, images, or videos.
• Engage with Questions:  Encourage questions and discussions to foster interaction and clarify points.
• Stay within Time Limits:  Respect time constraints and stay on schedule.

Peer Review Process

Before your research is published, it typically undergoes a peer review process. This involves experts in your field evaluating the quality, validity, and significance of your work. The peer review process aims to ensure the integrity and credibility of your research.

• Submission:  Submit your research manuscript to a journal or conference for review.
• Editorial Review:  The editorial team assesses your submission's fit with the journal's scope and may conduct an initial review for quality and compliance.
• Peer Review:  Your manuscript is sent to peer reviewers who evaluate it for methodology, validity, significance, and adherence to ethical standards.
• Feedback and Revision:  Based on reviewers' feedback, you may be asked to revise and improve your research.
• Acceptance or Rejection:  After revisions, the manuscript is reevaluated, and a decision is made regarding publication.

Publishing Your Research

Publishing your research is the final step in sharing your findings with the broader scientific community. It allows others to access and build upon your work. Consider the following when choosing where to publish:

• Journal Selection:  Choose a reputable journal that aligns with your research field and target audience.
• Review Process:  Understand the journal's peer review process and requirements for submission.
• Open Access:  Consider whether you want your research to be open access, freely accessible to all.

Once published, actively promote your research through academic networks, conferences, and social media to maximize its reach and impact.

By effectively reporting and communicating your research findings, you contribute to the advancement of knowledge, inspire others, and ensure that your hard work has a meaningful impact on your field and beyond.

Applied Research Examples

To provide a deeper understanding of applied research's impact and relevance, let's delve into specific real-world examples that demonstrate how this type of research has addressed pressing challenges and improved our lives in tangible ways.

Applied Medical Research: mRNA Vaccines

Example:  mRNA (messenger RNA) vaccine technology, exemplified by the COVID-19 vaccines developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, is a remarkable achievement in the field of applied medical research.

Applied researchers in this domain utilized mRNA technology to create vaccines that provide immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Unlike traditional vaccines, which use weakened or inactivated viruses, mRNA vaccines instruct cells to produce a harmless spike protein found on the virus's surface. The immune system then recognizes this protein and mounts a defense, preparing the body to combat the actual virus.

Impact:  The rapid development and deployment of mRNA vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic have been groundbreaking. They've played a crucial role in controlling the spread of the virus and saving countless lives worldwide. This example underscores how applied research can revolutionize healthcare and respond swiftly to global health crises.

Environmental Science and Applied Research: Ocean Cleanup

Example:  The Ocean Cleanup Project, founded by Boyan Slat, is an ambitious endeavor rooted in applied research to combat plastic pollution in the world's oceans.

This project employs innovative technology, such as large-scale floating barriers and autonomous systems, to collect and remove plastic debris from the ocean. Applied researchers have played a pivotal role in designing, testing, and optimizing these systems to make them efficient and environmentally friendly.

Impact:  The Ocean Cleanup Project is a testament to the power of applied research in addressing pressing environmental challenges. By removing plastic waste from the oceans, it mitigates harm to marine ecosystems and raises awareness about the urgent need for sustainable waste management.

Business and Applied Research: E-commerce Personalization

Example:   E-commerce giants like Amazon and Netflix use applied research to develop sophisticated personalization algorithms that tailor product recommendations and content to individual users.

Applied researchers in data science and machine learning analyze user behavior, preferences, and historical data to create recommendation systems. These algorithms utilize predictive analytics to suggest products, movies, or shows that align with a user's interests.

Impact:  The application of research-driven personalization has transformed the e-commerce and streaming industries. It enhances user experiences, increases customer engagement, and drives sales by presenting customers with products or content they are more likely to enjoy.

Education and Applied Research: Flipped Classroom Model

Example:  The Flipped Classroom Model is an applied research-based teaching approach that has gained popularity in education.

In this model, instructors leverage technology to deliver instructional content (such as video lectures) outside of class, allowing in-class time for active learning, discussions, and problem-solving. Applied research has informed the design and implementation of this pedagogical approach.

Impact:  The Flipped Classroom Model has shown promise in enhancing student engagement and learning outcomes. It capitalizes on research findings about how students learn best, emphasizing active participation and collaborative learning.

Agriculture and Applied Research: Precision Agriculture

Example:  Precision agriculture employs data-driven technology and applied research to optimize farming practices.

Farmers utilize satellite imagery, sensors, and data analytics to monitor crop conditions, soil health, and weather patterns. Applied research guides the development of precision farming techniques, enabling more efficient resource allocation and reducing environmental impact.

Impact:  Precision agriculture increases crop yields, conserves resources (such as water and fertilizer), and minimizes the ecological footprint of farming. This approach contributes to sustainable and economically viable agriculture.

These real-world examples underscore the versatility and impact of applied research across diverse domains. From healthcare and environmental conservation to business, education, and agriculture, applied research continually drives innovation, addresses critical challenges, and enhances the quality of life for individuals and communities worldwide.

Conclusion for Applied Research

Applied research is a powerful force for solving real-world problems and driving progress. By applying existing knowledge and innovative thinking, we can address healthcare challenges, protect our environment, improve businesses, enhance education, and revolutionize agriculture. Through this guide, you've gained valuable insights into the what, why, and how of applied research, unlocking the potential to make a positive impact in your field. So, go forth, conduct meaningful research, and be part of the solution to the world's most pressing issues. Remember, applied research is not just a concept; it's a practical approach that empowers individuals and teams to create solutions that matter. As you embark on your own applied research endeavors, keep the spirit of inquiry alive, remain open to new ideas, and never underestimate the transformative power of knowledge put into action.

How to Conduct Applied Research in Minutes?

Appinio , a real-time market research platform, is here to revolutionize your approach to applied research. Imagine having the power to get real-time consumer insights at your fingertips, enabling you to make swift, data-driven decisions for your business. Appinio takes care of all the heavy lifting in research and tech, so you can focus on what truly matters.

• Lightning-Speed Insights:  From posing questions to gaining insights, it takes mere minutes. When you need answers fast, Appinio delivers.
• User-Friendly:  No need for a PhD in research; our platform is so intuitive that anyone can use it effectively.
• Global Reach:  Access a diverse pool of respondents from over 90 countries, with the ability to define the perfect target group using 1200+ characteristics.

Get free access to the platform!

Join the loop 💌

Be the first to hear about new updates, product news, and data insights. We'll send it all straight to your inbox.

Get the latest market research news straight to your inbox! 💌

Wait, there's more

15.07.2024 | 14min read

Revolutionizing Brand Health with Mental Availability: All Key Takeaways

26.06.2024 | 35min read

Brand Development: Definition, Process, Strategies, Examples

18.06.2024 | 7min read

Future Flavors: How Burger King nailed Concept Testing with Predictive Insights

• Basic vs Applied Research: 15 Key Differences

Based on purpose or utility, a research approach can either be basic or applied. While basic research aims at expanding knowledge by creating new theories and modifying existing ones, applied research is focused on providing practical solutions to specific problems by analyzing empirical evidence. 

There are several meeting and departure points for these approaches, and it is pertinent for every researcher to understand them effectively. In this article, we will be detailing 15 key differences between basic and applied research methods, while also highlighting some similarities between these  research methodologies. 

What is Basic Research?  

Basic research is a research approach that is entirely theoretical and aimed at improving or expanding the knowledge-base of a particular field of study. It focuses on “knowledge for its own sake” and it is primarily driven by curiosity and the need to explore the unknown. 

It is also known as fundamental or pure research and it is a systematic investigation  set  to achieve a better and more detailed understanding of a research subject or phenomenon, not to solve  a specific problem. 

What is Applied Research?  

Applied research is designed to focus on providing  practical solutions to a specific problem. It is a form of investigation that entails  solution-oriented inquiries  into a phenomenon,a field of study or research subject generally employing  empirical methodologies. 

In many cases, applied research is a follow-up research design for basic research because it further investigates the outcomes of pure or basic research in order to validate these findings and apply them to create innovative solutions to specific problems. 

15 Differences Between Basic and Applied Research

• Definition  

Applied research is a research methodology that creates practical solutions for specific problems while basic research is an approach to research that seeks to expand knowledge in a field of study. This means that applied research is solution-driven while basic research is knowledge-specific. 

Basic research seeks to advance the frontiers of knowledge by creating new theories or modifying existing ones. On the other hand, applied research is primarily concerned with creating solutions to problems by collecting and analyzing empirical data in order to arrive at valid research outcomes. 

• Characteristics  

Applied research is primarily defined by its focus on providing a practical solution to a defined problem while basic research is primarily defined by its focus on expanding knowledge. In other words, basic research is theory-oriented, applied research is practical-oriented. 

Applied research is action-oriented and synthetic in nature while basic research is explanatory and analytical in nature. Basic research is solution-specific and primarily concerned with the expansion of knowledge and not with the application of research findings which is the focus of applied research.  

• Advantages of Basic Research over Applied Research

Basic research results in the acquisition of new knowledge and it also expands existing knowledge while applied research does not lead to the acquisition of new knowledge. Applied research only focuses on applying knowledge to solve existing problems hence, it is solution-specific. 

Findings from basic research have been predominantly responsible for breakthroughs in different fields of study while findings from applied research are primarily useful for solving specific research problems. Hence, basic research is universal in nature while applied research is limited in nature. 

• Advantages of Applied Research over Basic Research

Applied research helps organizations and individuals to solve specific problems, unlike basic research that is simply focused on expanding knowledge without providing solutions to existing problems. This, however, does not negate the fact that findings from basic research are useful to proffer  solutions to problems. 

Unlike basic research which  is somewhat subjective in its approach, applied research is an objective method of inquiry. Typically, applied research is unbiased because it arrives at outcomes by subjecting empirical evidence to standardized scientific procedures and this makes it a more valid research method. 

• Examples in Education

In education, applied research is used to improve teaching and learning methods by providing practical solutions to pedagogic problems. On the other hand, basic research is used in education to develop new pedagogic theories that explain different behaviors by teachers and students within the learning environment. 

Examples of basic research in education include: 

• How does the human memory work?
• How do children acquire new languages? 

Examples of applied research in education include: 

• A study to build students’ interests in religious studies.
• A study to improve classroom interaction between teachers and students. 
• Examples in Health

Applied research helps health and medical practitioners to develop evidence-based solutions to pressing health problems. On the other hand, basic research helps medical practitioners to gain insights into different health issues such as the origin and symptoms of diseases and infections which can be useful in developing a cure for such conditions. 

Examples of basic research in health include: 

• An investigation into the secondary symptoms of the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV). 
• An investigation into the symptoms of diarrhea. 

Examples of applied research in health include: 

• An investigation to determine the healing properties of mushrooms.
• An investigation to determine the side effects of alcohol consumption. 
• Examples in Psychology

Applied research is extremely useful in industrial-psychology to create solutions for problems related to workplace behavior, organizational policies and employee recruitment processes. Basic research in psychology is used to gain insights into different psychological conditions in order to understand these behaviors better. 

Examples of basic research in psychology include:

• How do panic attacks happen? 
• What are the symptoms of anxiety disorders? 

Examples of applied research in psychology include: 

• What are the treatment options for anxiety disorders?
• What are the ways to improve employees’ productivity in the workplace? 
• Other Names  

Basic research is also known as pure or fundamental research because it is knowledge-specific while applied research is also referred to as contractual research because of its primary focus on providing a solution to a specific problem. 

Applied research is useful for finding practical solutions to defined problems while basic research is useful for gathering novel information about a concept, phenomenon or field of study. 

Basic research explores the functions and features of newly discovered phenomena in order to improve the understanding of these concepts hence; it fuels scientific and technological innovations. Applied research, on the other hand, helps to provide solutions to improve a specific condition or create new technology. 

• Research Purpose

Basic research is driven by curiosity and the need to explore new areas of knowledge in different fields. On the other hand, applied research is driven by the need to provide answers to specific questions in order to solve a problem. 

This means that applied research is primarily concerned with examining empirical evidence for answers while in basic research, the researcher examines data samples in order to gather more information about them. Such information improves the quality of knowledge of the  subject matter. 

• Research Context

Basic research is conducted in a controlled research environment such as a laboratory while conceptual research is conducted in a real-life setting that is not sterile or restricted. The sterile research context in basic research allows the researcher to strictly observe the behaviors and characteristics of the research subjects. 

In applied research, however, the researcher allows the dependent and independent variables to freely interact with one another in an unrestricted setting where other variables or third factors may intervene. This allows the researcher to have a broader overview of the research problem and arrive at valid and practical solutions. 

• Scope of the Research

Generally, applied research is more limited in scope when compared to basic research. This is because unlike basic research that can be applied to diverse concepts, applied research largely focuses on a specific subject, and its research outcomes are primarily relevant to this subject. 

Because it deals with diverse concepts across different subject matters, basic research is considered a more universal research method than conceptual research. Fundamental research explores knowledge across multiple dimensions in order to gather new information and improve an existing body of knowledge. 

• Theory Formulation

Basic research aims at formulating theories that explain research findings and in the process,  improve   a body of knowledge while applied research aims at arriving at research findings that can solve practical problems. Basic research focuses on principles and theories while applied research focuses on solutions. 

Typically, basic research aims at formulating theories and generalizations that explain a concept, subject or phenomenon and are universally applicable. On the other hand, applied research or conceptual research studies empirical evidence in order to align its findings with a specific problem.  

• Research Outcomes

After carrying out applied research by testing the empirical evidence, the researcher arrives at valid findings or conclusions that confirm or negate the research hypotheses. These findings typically answer the specific research questions, that is, the reason for the applied research. 

On the other hand, at the endpoint of basic research lies new theories, new dimensions to existing theories or new information that improves on a body of knowledge. The outcomes of basic research do not directly serve as innovative solutions to a practical problem. 

• Research Approach

Basic research is theoretical in nature while applied research is practical in nature. In this sense, basic research generates theories and improves on existing theories with the aim of contributing to an existing knowledge bank. 

Applied research, on the other hand, is practical and more descriptive in nature . It is more concerned with the utility and value of research outcomes in terms of their end usage, that is, how they can be used to solve existing problems and develop innovations. 

Are There Similarities Between Applied and Basic Research ? 

• Data Gathering Methods

basic and applied research adopt similar data collection processes in order to gather relevant data and arrive at the most objective research outcomes. They typically make use of qualitative and quantitative data gathering methods such as interviews, questionnaires, surveys, and focus groups to gather information and arrive at research outcomes. 

• Intersectionality

The research outcomes of basic research often serve as the bedrock for applied research.  

• Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Basic and applied research methods make use of both inductive and deductive reasoning to support the research hypotheses. In deductive reasoning, the researcher moves from the idea to observation, while in inductive reasoning, the researcher transits from observation to the idea. 

Conclusion  

It is important for  researchers to understand the similarities and differences between applied and basic research methods. As  highlighted earlier, the major difference between applied and basic research is the purpose of the research, that is, what the research is set to achieve.

Apart from the purpose of the research, applied and basic research also differ based on the research outcomes, nature of the research and its contexts, to mention but a few. However, both research methods adopt similar data gathering processes including observation and interviews, in order to arrive at objective outcomes. 

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

• applied basic research differences
• Applied research
• applied vs basic research
• busayo.longe

You may also like:

What is Pure or Basic Research? + [Examples & Method]

Simple guide on pure or basic research, its methods, characteristics, advantages, and examples in science, medicine, education and psychology

What is Applied Research? + [Types, Examples & Method]

Simple guide on applied research; its types, examples, characteristics, methods, and advantages

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

Recall Bias: Definition, Types, Examples & Mitigation

This article will discuss the impact of recall bias in studies and the best ways to avoid them during research.

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

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

• Home »
• Advice »

What is the Difference Between a Dissertation and a Thesis?

Find your perfect postgrad program search our database of 30,000 courses.

And to make it even more confusing, some institutions or departments will even use the terms differently!

But what are we all really talking about when we refer to a dissertation or a thesis? And does the term you use actually impact on what you actually end up writing?

This article covers the main differences between a dissertation and thesis, and how the terms may differ depending on the course, university and location.

What is a dissertation?

A dissertation is a piece of academic writing centred around original research. In their dissertations, students review existing research but also build on this with unique hypotheses and approaches.

A dissertation can be used to disprove a previous theory or take existing theories and research in a new direction. It is a large research project that is usually completed at the end of the academic year.

Usually, a dissertation starts with a dissertation proposal , which is approved by a study supervisor. The student then completes the research and writes up the methodology , findings, evaluations and conclusions from the research.

Dissertations can be undertaken by both undergraduate and postgraduate students. At undergraduate level the word count is around 5,000 to 8,000 and at postgraduate level it is usually 10,000 to 15,000.

What is a thesis?

A thesis is an academic paper covering an in-depth review of existing research in a particular discipline. It will involve an academic argument, although it doesn’t usually require original research from the student. The existing research is used to support and evaluate the proposed argument.

A thesis is not usually required at undergraduate level and is more common at postgraduate level.

This large piece of written-up research is usually completed at the end of a masters degree. Some masters courses require a thesis to graduate.

Differences between a dissertation vs thesis

The main purpose of a writing a dissertation is to add new findings to the existing literature in that field with original research. Whereas theses tend to evaluate existing findings, as their purpose is to demonstrate knowledge and skills within the course’s subject matter.

In terms of how long it takes to complete a thesis or dissertation project, a thesis is typically shorter than a dissertation since there are fewer original research aspects involved. This means that it will probably take less time. However, this can differ depending on the university and the course.

Dissertations sometimes require an oral presentation, known as a viva , where findings are showcased to academics who ask questions about the research. Theses usually do not require this.

The root of the words 

The word ‘dissertation’ originates from the Latin word ‘dissertare’, meaning to continue to discuss and the Latin word ‘disserere’ which means to examine and discuss .

The word ‘thesis’ originally comes from the Greek word ‘tithenai’, which means to place or position. This later evolved into the Latin ‘thesis’, which had two meanings: an abstract question and to put something forward .

Similarities between a dissertation vs thesis

Although there are some key differences between a dissertation and a thesis, there are also similarities.

• Both are generally long pieces of academic writing, much longer than a typical essay.
• Both explore a topic in depth, whether you are conducting totally unique research or structuring an argument based on existing research.
• Both are considered a final project and usually required to graduate from a degree, masters or PhD. Students can graduate without a thesis or dissertation if they choose to complete a postgraduate diploma or postgraduate certificate instead.
• Excellent academic writing skills are highly important for both types of research project.

Is a dissertation harder than a thesis?

Though, the difficulty of a thesis or dissertation depends on your personal skill set. For instance, students that learn better by developing their own research ideas may find a dissertation easier than a thesis.

Difficulty can also depend on the level of the course. For instance, a thesis completed at doctorate level is likely to require more advanced knowledge than a thesis at undergraduate level.

The difficulty of either type of research project can also vary depending on the subject matter and the resources available to you.

Both dissertations and theses can be challenging, but don’t be put off by the thought of having to produce a larger body of work. Your supervisor will be there to support you.

Definitions depend on where you are

The terms ‘dissertation’ and ‘thesis’ are sometimes used interchangeably, and the meanings can differ depending on the country and university.

There are plenty of differences between the variant forms of English, such as British English and American English. Around the world, different English-speaking countries use the words ‘dissertation’ and ‘thesis’ differently. 

Generally, nations with British-based academic systems of university education use dissertation to refer to the body of work at the end of an undergraduate or masters level degree . British-based institutions generally use thesis to refer to the body of work produced at the end of a PhD . 

In countries and institutions that are based on the American system of education, the words tend to be used in reverse. However, institutions and even different departments in the same university can use the words differently. 

If you're in doubt, then stick with the way the university and department you're currently attending use the terms. 

Definitions can depend on the subject

In the UK, the terms ‘dissertation’ and ‘thesis’ are generally applied equally across institutions and subjects. 

However, in the US the meanings can differ between different subject areas. The term ‘thesis’ can be used to describe a piece of original research in US academia, whereas original research is usually referred to as a dissertation in the UK. 

If you’re studying in the US , you may complete a thesis at masters level in another subject area that involves wide-ranging reading and understanding rather than original research and still call it a thesis.

With so much interchangeability between the two terms, it’s understandable that there is often confusion in the debate between a dissertation vs thesis, as there is no clear answer. 

Always read specific course details to understand exactly what’s involved in the research project that you are required to produce.

Examples from US and UK universities

Georgetown University in the US refers to a dissertation and a thesis as both adding to your 'field of knowledge' . The University of Edinburgh recommends that you refer to your individual course handbook for guides to dissertations, so each department will have their own guidelines to using the word dissertation and thesis. At University College London they refer to a thesis as the piece of work at the end of an EngD, MPhil, MD(Res) or PhD, which are all research degrees. 

In conclusion

Ultimately, it doesn't really matter which word you use as both refer to a serious and lengthy piece of work where you can show what you have researched and understood as part of your postgraduate studies.

As long as you are referring to the piece of work that you are compiling in the same way as those in your department then you will avoid confusion.

It is important to check whether the research piece involves original research or expects you to build upon existing research.

Writing a dissertation or a thesis requires a substantial amount of planning and work and you don't want to let yourself down at the last hurdle with poor presentation of your work, so always keep an eye on your course or department guidelines.

Related articles

Top Tips On Writing Your Postgraduate Dissertation Or Thesis

How To Write A Thesis

Writing A Dissertation Proposal

Top Thesis Writing Tools

Postgrad Solutions Study Bursaries

Exclusive bursaries Open day alerts Funding advice Application tips Latest PG news

Complete Our Destination Survey

Take 2 minutes to complete our Destination Survey for the chance to win a Postgrad Study Bursary worth £2,000.

All we need to know is:

• Your university
• Your PG course

The relationship between basic and applied research in universities

• Open access
• Published: 25 March 2015
• Volume 70 , pages 689–709, ( 2015 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Peter James Bentley 1 ,
• Magnus Gulbrandsen 2 &
• Svein Kyvik 3  

58k Accesses

75 Citations

9 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

What is the central research activity in modern universities? This paper uses a comprehensive survey among individuals from 15 countries to map differences in orientation towards basic/fundamental research, applied/practical research and a combination of the two. Despite some claims in the literature that basic research is no longer a preoccupation of universities, our findings point at a continued strong presence of basic research in universities but with large variations between countries and academic disciplines. At the individual level, most academics engage in a combination of basic and applied research, rather than specialising, with applied orientations generally more common. Academics specialising in basic research tend to receive less external funding, work in environments where applied research is less emphasised and hold weaker professional obligations to apply their knowledge to problems in society.

Similar content being viewed by others

Defining the Research University in Azerbaijan: Imported Global Trends or Rebranded Soviet Legacy?

Teaching and Research in Germany: The Notions of University Professors

Australian academics, teaching and research: history, vexed issues and potential changes.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

The higher education literature is bursting with examples of how universities are changing in response to societal transformations and new demands. Many of these changes are described in rather pessimistic terms because they imply reduced funding, different activities and numerous tensions and challenges (Enders 2013 ). Only by protecting their so-called academic heartland can universities retain a degree of autonomy and a connection with widely shared values among their employees (Clark 1998 ). Long-term scientific work is at the centre of this heartland.

Basic research, or research undertaken with a primary purpose of the advancement of knowledge for its own sake, has traditionally been fundamental to university missions and their public funding. The “linear model” of innovation, popular during the post-1945 era, saw basic research as the primary contributor to innovation and economic growth, with universities as the institutional locus for public funding (Mowery and Sampat 2005 ). However, the centrality of basic research has come under question. The Mode 2 thesis, first outlined in The New Production of Knowledge by Gibbons et al. ( 1994 ), argued that disinterested, academic-oriented, disciplinary and autonomous research conducted exclusively within universities (Mode 1) is no longer the core mode of knowledge production. Mode 2 knowledge, produced within the context of application, has become the dominant form. Revisiting the Mode 2 discourse, Nowotny et al. ( 2003 ) summarised: “… the research that is variously described as ‘pure’, ‘blue-skies’, fundamental, or disinterested, is now a minority preoccupation—even in universities” (p. 184).

The Mode 2 diagnosis is broader than just the decline of fundamental research, and it also includes shifts towards collaborative and transdisciplinary research, greater heterogeneity in the sites of knowledge production, deeper social accountability and broader forms of quality control (beyond discipline-based peer review). The exceptionally wide scope of the Mode 2 discourse has been criticised for its lack of coherence and empirical validity (Hessels and Van Lente 2008 ). To date, there has been little evidence to support or refute Nowotny et al. ( 2003 ) claims, yet the Mode 2 discourse has influenced higher education and research policy makers and has been cited in almost ten thousand documents, with the vast majority of scientific papers treating it as an accepted or background concept (Hessels and Van Lente 2008 ).

Mode 2 is not necessarily new or unique, and it competes with other popular characterisations of the changing research agenda, some of which predate it. In the 1980s, Irvine and Martin ( 1984 ) identified the emergence of “strategic research”, combining academic excellence with an orientation towards future practical utility. According to Rip ( 2004 ), strategic research is the basic way of carrying out research in the regime of “strategic science”. However, strategic research retains a linearity between basic research and practical utility, including basic research as a cornerstone of its definition: “Strategic research [is] basic research carried out with the expectation that it will produce a broad base of knowledge likely to form the background to the solution of recognized current or future practical problems” (Irvine and Martin 1984 ). A similar conceptualisation, “translational research”, shares many of these characteristics, focussing on the harnessing of basic research for practical uses, particularly within the health sciences (Woolf 2008 ). Other conceptualisations, such as “finalised science” and “post-normal science”, also emphasise strong practice orientation, but these concepts are much more nuanced in their interpretation, limiting their implications to certain disciplines or policy-relevant fields (Weingart 1997 ).

More recently, the triple helix model of university–industry–government relations has also had considerable impact on research policy (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000 ). Like Mode 2, it contends that the future legitimation of science depends upon application orientation and contribution to economic development. However, it distinguishes itself from Mode 2 because universities retain distinctiveness as the core knowledge institutions and the application orientation process is emergent, rather than complete (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000 ). Academic capitalism also stresses the growing engagement of academics in application-oriented and commercially funded research, but the extent of such engagement is limited based on the closeness of one’s discipline to the market (Slaughter and Leslie 1997 ). Overall, the Mode 2 claims regarding the shifting research agenda away from fundamental research is unique only in its comprehensiveness, particularly with reference to country and disciplinary context.

This study is in particular interested in the claim that universities are no longer preoccupied with basic or theoretical research. Our decision to limit ourselves to this component follows Hessels and van Lente’s ( 2008 ) recommendation that Mode 2’s impact necessitates empirical research on each of the constitutive parts separately. We do so by drawing on data from an international survey among academic staff in research universities in 15 countries and across 10 academic fields. The lack of international comparable indicators has been a crucial limitation for understanding how universities operate in national innovation systems (Mowery and Sampat 2005 , p. 234). The comparative dimension allows us to test whether the assumptions surrounding Mode 2 apply to different contexts. Firstly, we investigate the extent to which individual academics worldwide consider basic or theoretical research a core part of their current research. Secondly, we examine the extent to which academics specialise only in basic or applied research, or combine these activities. Thirdly, we investigate variations in the extent to which academics specialise only in basic or applied research. Why might some academics within certain countries and academic fields choose to engage in both types of research, while others choose not to? We investigate three possible explanations. We expect engagement in basic and applied research to relate to: access to external commercial research funding; institutional expectations/policies; and individual normative/social behaviour.

Question 1: To what extent is basic research still a defining characteristic of universities across the world?

Nowotny et al. ( 2003 ) are clear regarding three generalisable causes for the decline in fundamental research: increased steering of research priorities; increased commercialisation of research (resulting from decreased public funding and increased attention to intellectual property ownership); and broader accountability of science.

The limited evidence of how individual academics view their primary research points to the contrary that basic research continues to be sustained as a major activity. A large-scale Finnish investigation found that an “academic orientation” with strong emphasis on basic research remains central across disciplinary fields (Ylijoki et al. 2011 ). The authors question the thesis that a significant transformation is taking place in universities, arguing instead that academics find different ways to combine an academic orientation with various forms of societal engagement. A UK interview study found the same, although it also emphasised how the term “basic research” is flexible and may be adapted to varying circumstances (Calvert 2006 ). Gulbrandsen and Kyvik ( 2010 ) also found that 90 % of Norwegian academics undertook basic research, with slightly less than half declaring their research “very much” basic (maximum value on a five-point scale), confirming other findings that basic research remains a strong identity marker for university staff (Gulbrandsen and Langfeldt 2004 ). These results are indicative of the resilience of basic research within universities, but may not be generalisable to other countries. Public funding of university research retains a strong position in Norway (Kyvik 2007 ).

National context is potentially of greater importance to understanding changes in knowledge production than implied by the Mode 2 thesis. Even if one acknowledges that universities across the world have experienced increased steering of research priorities and accountability pressures, it is unlikely that the effects would be uniform across countries. Shinn ( 2002 ) argues there is little evidence that science has become de-nationalised and it is inappropriate to generalise broad changes across national settings. According to Shinn, despite globalisation trends, universities, business and government still function predominantly within the national settings. The interaction between these institutions has implications for university governance and research behaviours. European countries have stronger traditions of academic self-determination, whereas market coordination has stronger traditions in most English-speaking countries and state control in parts of Asia (Clark 1983 ). Even within regions of similar academic traditions, convergences in higher education policies have not diluted the national character of academic labour markets and their internal regulation of research (Musselin 2005 ). This makes a data set from different countries particularly valuable.

National governments remain the main funder of university research in almost all OECD countries, but this varies from over 80 % of total funding of R&D in higher education institutions in Argentina, Australia, Italy, Finland, Germany, Norway and the Netherlands to closer to two-thirds in the USA, UK and Canada, and just over half of all funding in China (OECD 2013 ). Countries also differ in how this public funding is allocated to universities for research. According to Auranen and Nieminen ( 2010 ), core public research funding is determined predominantly via input-orientated measures in many European countries (e.g. Norway, Finland, Netherlands and Germany), whereas output-oriented funding models are more dominant in Australia and the UK. Although many European countries have been moving towards output-oriented funding models, there has been stronger resistance from universities and their implementation has been weaker. This likely reflects the traditionally stronger academic oligarchy within these countries (Clark 1983 ).

The implications for engagement in basic research is not directly clear, but one would reasonably assume that country-level differences in how universities are governed and funded would lead to greater diversity in research behaviours. For example, systems with greater levels of core funding based on input measures have higher levels of stability compared to output-oriented and externally funded systems (Auranen and Nieminen 2010 ). By implication, risky, fundamental and disinterested basic research may be more likely to flourish in the countries with more predictable funding. Although we cannot test empirically why country-level differences in basic research engagement may exist (countries differ across a range of idiosyncratic characteristics, not just governance or funding), it is appropriate to test the robustness of Nowotny and colleague’s general claims.

Question 2: To what extent do academics specialise only in basic or applied research, or combine these activities?

If universities are no longer preoccupied with pure, fundamental and disinterested research, what have become the dominant research preoccupations? Nowotny et al. ( 2003 ) discuss how Mode 2 knowledge production is characterised by diversity, reflexivity and a shift away from the stable, clear and unchallengeable taxonomy of disciplinary research. Further, the original Mode 2 argument stated that Mode 2 did not replace Mode 1; it supplemented and grew alongside it (Gibbons et al. 1994 ). Accordingly, individual academics engaged in Mode 2 knowledge production may continue to be involved in basic research alongside application-oriented research. Adding further complexity, application orientation (and the four other attributes characterising Mode 2 knowledge) is “not present in every instance of Mode 2” (Gibbons et al. 1994 , p. 8). Thus, application orientation is neither a prerequisite, nor a sufficient, characterisation of Mode 2. This is similar to Stokes’ ( 1997 ) argument that considerations of use often go hand in hand with a quest for fundamental understanding. Despite these challenges, one may reasonably understand Nowotny et al. ( 2003 ) argument to imply a shift in the balance between basic and applied research, towards more applied research specialists.

The few studies that have reported on this issue indicate, however, that a traditional academic orientation is resilient rather than new combinations. Albert ( 2003 ) found no evidence that Canadian academics in sociology and economics departments had shifted their research attention away from disciplinary research intended for their peers and begun specialising in interdisciplinary and practical research. Studies of scientists in the Netherlands (van Rijnsoever and Hessels 2011 ) and Finnish academics in technology, social science and humanities departments (Hakala and Ylijoki 2001 ) also indicate high commitment to Mode 1-type research over purely applied research. Finally, Gulbrandsen and Kyvik ( 2010 ) found that few Norwegian academics in 2000 were engaged exclusively in basic research, but this was still greater than the proportion engaged exclusively in applied research, although a combination was most common for all university staff members. Each of these aforementioned studies is somewhat limited by their national context. Our international data provide us with a useful opportunity to examine this relationship.

Another contextual limitation of the Mode 2 thesis is academic field (Hessels and Van Lente 2008 ). Disciplinary cultures span international boundaries and influence what types of research are considered legitimate within the scientific community (Becher 1994 ). Weingart ( 1997 ) argues that Mode 2 attributes, such as application-oriented research, make little sense in scientific disciplines distanced from policy makers. Likewise, Godin ( 1998 ) notes the difficulty certain disciplines face when modifying their research towards applied and practical purposes. According to Becher ( 1994 ), academic disciplines differ in their cognitive knowledge structure from pure (theoretical) to applied (pragmatic). Applied disciplines within the technological sciences (e.g. engineering) are purposive and pragmatic in their knowledge, oriented towards mastery of the physical environment, resulting in products/techniques. In the pure sciences (e.g. physics), knowledge is cumulative, atomistic, well organised and results in discovery or explanation, rather than directly practical outputs. Social sciences and humanities may also be pure or applied, depending on whether they are oriented towards practical, utilitarian and functional improvements to professional practice (e.g. education), or understanding and interpretation (e.g. humanities).

Based on Becher’s typology, we may expect specialisation in basic research to be more common in the hard-pure disciplines (e.g. life sciences and physical sciences) and soft-pure disciplines (humanities and social sciences). By contrast, specialisation in applied research may be more common in the science-based professions within hard-applied disciplines (e.g. agriculture, engineering, medical sciences) and social professions within the soft-applied disciplines (e.g. education, law). Our data will allow us to extend disciplinary-based findings from specific countries to an international context, controlling for other individual-level factors.

Question 3: What might explain individual differences in specialisation versus combining basic and applied research?

Few universities are completely insulated from the increased steering of research priorities, commercialisation and accountability pressures, but this does not imply that individual academics will respond in consistent and uniform ways. Despite the decline in autonomy, academics still retain a relatively high degree of discretion over their non-teaching hours and have the freedom to seek research activities of professional and personal engagement, although the latter may not always be compatible with a secure academic career (Davies 2013 ). Why might some academics in comparable disciplines and countries engage predominantly in basic research, while others do not? We put forward three possible explanations: commercial research funding, institutional expectations and professional norms.

Nowotny et al. ( 2003 ) argue that inadequacy of public funding has caused universities to shift their research preoccupation away from basic research. Government core funding of research has declined in a range of OECD countries, and the mechanisms for disbursing public funds have shifted from stable block grants towards results-based models

(Auranen and Nieminen 2010 ). Given that basic research leads to unpredictable results and tends to attract little private sector funding, we may expect that access to business and industry funding will also be a differentiator between individual academics for basic and applied research engagement within countries. Academics able to source business and industry funding for research are less reliant on dwindling institutional funding and may be more likely to be engaged in applied research.

A second important factor is institutional expectations for research. Universities across the world have seen stakeholder expectations widen and deepen, including the expectations for producing practical knowledge and training. Clark ( 1998 ) describes the situation in terms of a demand-response imbalance: “demands on universities outrun their capacity to respond” (p. 6). In terms of functional differentiation, modern universities are characterised by “overcomplexity and underdifferentiation” (Enders 2013 ). However, universities are not entirely victims of past history and stakeholder demands. Universities are capable of choosing which stakeholder demands to respond to, where within the organisation these responses will occur and how. For example, entrepreneurial responses may occur at the “developmental periphery”, where traditional disciplinary research meets the outside world through interdisciplinary research, contract research, contract education and consultancy (Clark 1998 ). Such engagement with external stakeholders can diversify the funding base, promote an entrepreneurial culture throughout the university, as well as stimulate the “academic heartland” where traditional disciplinary and theoretical research is maintained. In other words, universities have the capability to respond to stakeholder needs by promoting commercial and interdisciplinary research. Therefore, we may expect that academics who work in such environments will be more likely to engage in applied research and not necessarily to the detriment of their engagement in basic research.

A third factor explaining diversity is professional norms. One of the defining characteristics of academia is autonomy and protection from external influence. The freedom of professors to teach without external control was a core principle of the mediaeval university and has influenced the development of universities, not just in Central and Western Europe, but also in the USA (Altbach 2001 ). The emergence of privately funded, practically oriented research for commercial or technology transfer purposes in the mid- to late twentieth century challenged established scientific norms, particularly the norms of disinterested research and public ownership of knowledge (Stuart and Ding 2006 ). The changing funding patterns have been described as placing the future of basic research in jeopardy (Altbach 2001 ). However, scientific norms are not static. Etzkowitz ( 1998 ) argues that scientific norms have progressively accepted commercial research and academic entrepreneurialism with profit-making motives. These normative changes may be considered the “second revolution” in academia, following the first revolution which made research a core function of universities. Given the challenges that applied research poses to traditional scientific norms, we expect that engagement in applied research will reflect how individuals view applied research. Those who view applied research as a professional obligation will be more likely to be more engaged in applied research.

Data and methodology

The data come from the changing academic profession (CAP) international survey of the academic profession across 19 countries during 2007–2008: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China and Hong Kong, Finland, Germany, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Republic of Korea, UK and the USA. The CAP project used a common random sampling protocol and survey instrument. The target population of the CAP survey was professionals in universities or other higher education institutions offering a baccalaureate degree or higher. Given that this article addresses research orientation, we restrict ourselves to academics employed in universities with research and teaching missions, generally those universities awarding doctorate degrees (i.e. excluding polytechnics, teaching-focused colleges, research institutes). We exclude four of the 19 countries from our analysis. This is due to an inability to differentiate between teaching-focused and research-focused universities or small sample sizes (Japan and Korea), low response rate (Portugal) or limited information on the sampling framework (South Africa).

The response rates, including partially completed responses, were mostly below 40 per cent. Therefore, there is a potential risk of non-response bias in some countries. However, national samples were found broadly representative of the respective populations on strata such as gender, academic rank and institutional type (Cummings and Finkelstein 2012 ; RIHE 2008 ; Vabø and Ramberg 2009 ). Further, there are few reasons to expect that non-respondents would differ substantially in terms of self-declared research orientation. After removing non-respondents to the core questions regarding basic and applied research orientation and respondents not employed in academic ranks, we were left with a sample of 12,379 academics (Table  1 ).

Dependent variable: measuring basic and applied research

We consider Nowotny et al. ( 2003 ) references to “pure”, “blue skies”, “fundamental” or “disinterested” research to be analogous to basic or theoretical research and context of application to be analogous to applied or practically oriented research. Our data for measuring research orientation come directly from the CAP survey. The relevant question asked: “How would you characterize the emphasis of your primary research this (or for the previous) academic year?” Respondents provided a score ranging from “very much” (1) to “not at all” (5) on seven separate criteria. This study examines the results for two of these criteria: “basic/theoretical” and “applied/practically oriented”. The explicit reference to theory and practical orientation is consistent with the extended definitions of basic and applied research in the OECD’s Frascati Manual ( 2002 ). Given that respondents provided scores on each criterion separately, it was up to individual to determine whether the concepts of basic and applied research were mutually exclusive or inclusive.

We are interested both in the extent to which basic research is a defining characteristic of academic work, as well as its relationship with applied research. We distinguish between five distinct research orientations: pure basic; leaning towards basic; equally, basic and applied; leaning towards applied; and pure applied. A sixth category for respondents with neither basic nor applied research orientation is a residual category for those not declaring a clear research orientation. The definition of each research orientation group and number of respondents in each group is presented as a cross-tabulated matrix in Table  2 .

There are certain limitations which may affect how the research results are interpreted. Firstly, there is a risk that the concepts of “basic”, “theoretical”, “applied” and “practically oriented” may be understood differently across countries, particularly after translation into local language. In countries where English was not the language of the survey, most used a combination of professional translators, academic translators, survey piloting and peer review (e.g. regions with common languages), in addition to internal review by the project team.

Although we are confident the concepts of basic and applied research were translated accurately, there is a risk the concepts are interpreted differently, particularly in countries where research has not traditionally been conducted within universities. Secondly, one assumes that differences in response to Likert-type questions reflect differences in substantive engagement and that engagement is related to contextual factors such as research norms of the discipline or institution. However, academics may exaggerate or define their research in accordance with norms, rather than contextual factors influencing substantive engagement.

Independent variables: factors associated with research orientation

The operationalisation of independent variables is outlined below. Means on each variable are listed for each country in Table  4 of “ Appendix ”.

Country is a dichotomous variable based on country of employment: Argentina; Australia; Brazil; Canada; China; Finland; Germany; Hong Kong; Italy; Malaysia; Mexico; Netherlands; Norway; UK; and USA.

Academic discipline is a dichotomous variable based on discipline of one’s current academic unit: education (teacher training and education science); humanities (humanities and arts); social sciences (social and behavioural sciences); commerce (business and administration, economics); law; life sciences; physical sciences (physical sciences, mathematics, computer sciences); engineering (engineering, manufacturing and construction, architecture); agriculture; medicine (medical sciences, health-related sciences, social services); and other (personal services, transport services, security services or other). Based on Becher’s ( 1994 ) disciplinary typology, we expect basic research to continue to be a core preoccupation of academics within hard-pure sciences and soft-pure social sciences and humanities.

Commercial research funding is the percentage of one’s research funding (in the current or previous academic year) which came from business firms or industry. We expect that engagement in applied research will be greater among those academics with greater access to external commercial research funding.

Individual normative/social behaviour includes one scale variable based on the ordinal responses (from “strongly agree” [5] to “strongly disagree” [1]) to the following statement: “Faculty in my discipline have a professional obligation to apply their knowledge to problems in society”. We expect that engagement in applied research will reflect the extent to which individuals view applied research as a professional obligation.

Institutional norms and expectations/policy/strategy includes one scale variable based on the ordinal responses (from “strongly agree” [5] to “strongly disagree” [1]) to the following statement: “Your institution emphasizes commercially-oriented or applied research”. We expect that academics working in environments emphasising commercially oriented and applied research will tend to engage more in applied research.

Basic research as a pre-occupation

Our first research question addressed the extent to which basic research is still a defining characteristic of universities. When asked to characterise the emphasis of their primary research in the previous year on a scale of 1 (“very much”) to 5 (“not at all”), 61 % reported significant engagement in basic research (values of 1 or 2). Very few academics (7 %) reported being “not at all” engaged in basic research, with the remainder engaged partly in basic research (32 %). Based on these results, Nowotny et al. ( 2003 ) claim that fundamental research is a minority preoccupation in universities received little empirical support, with 93 % reporting at least some engagement with basic research. At the very least, claims that fundamental research is a minority preoccupation should be qualified by country. Levels of significant engagement in basic research ranged from 78 % in China to half of all academics in Argentina (50 %). Universities in Argentina, and to a lesser extent, Brazil, tend to employ a large number of part-time and teaching-only staff, but this does not account for their relatively weak engagement in basic research. Part-time staff in these countries did not differ from their full-time colleagues in their engagement in basic research.

Although most academics engage in basic research, a greater proportion report engagement in applied research. To this extent, fundamental research may not be the primary preoccupation of universities, even though the majority engage in it. More than two-thirds (69 %) of academics characterised their research as applied to a large extent, one quarter (25 %) were partly engaged in applied research, and 6 % not at all. China was again the country where academics were most likely to report strong engagement in applied research (86 %). Norway and the Netherlands were the only countries where more academics reported significant engagement in basic research compared to applied research. The proportion of academics in each country reporting significant engagement in basic research (values of 1 or 2) is shown in Fig.  1 on the left-hand bar, while the proportion reporting significant engagement in applied research is shown on the right-hand bar. Note that the basic and applied characterisations were derived from separate questions. Therefore, it was up to the respondent to decide whether the two categories (basic and applied) were mutually exclusive characterisations. The fact that sum of both bars exceeds 100 % in all countries is evidence that many academics do not consider these characterisations as mutually exclusive.

Proportion of academics whose primary research was to a considerable extent basic/theoretical ( left-hand bar ) and applied/practical ( right-hand bar ), by country

Specialisation versus the coexistence of basic and applied research

In order to investigate the relationship between basic and applied research, and tendency towards specialisation, we exclude respondents who were not sufficiently engaged in basic or applied research. Rather than being engaged in research outside the basic/applied typologies, academics with no clear research orientation are better understood as insufficiently research active. For example, they published little, spent very few hours on research and were also unlikely to characterise their research in other ways (e.g. commercially oriented, single disciplinary or interdisciplinary). These 998 respondents were classified as “neither basic nor applied” in Table  2 (8 % of the total sample) and are subsequently excluded from the valid cases for further analysis.

Among academics with clear research orientations, 14 % specialised as “pure basic” researchers. On this basis, only a small minority of academics may be understood to be preoccupied entirely with basic research. However, the lack of specialisation was not primarily due to a tendency to specialise in applied research, and only 17 % could be considered “pure applied” researchers. The bulk of the sample engaged in both basic and applied research. The most frequent categorisation was “equally, basic and applied” (27 %), followed by “leaning towards applied” (24 %) and “leaning towards basic” (18 %). In other words, basic research is not the primary preoccupation of most academics, but this is because it is integrated with applied research in most cases.

Specialisation varied considerably across countries. Pure basic researchers were most common in Italy, Netherlands and Norway, comprising roughly one quarter of all academics and outnumbering those in the pure-applied category. At the other extreme, almost no academics were specialised in basic research in China (2 %) and Malaysia (5 %). However, this reflected a greater tendency to combine basic and applied research in these countries, rather than an aversion to basic research. The balance between basic and applied research was most skewed in Australia, where pure applied researchers were more than twice as common as pure basic researchers. The proportion of academics specialising in basic or applied research by country is shown in Fig.  2 . The full breakdown across the five research orientation categories is shown for each country in Table  5 of “ Appendix ”.

Proportion of academics engaged purely in basic/theoretical research ( left-hand bar ) and purely applied/practical research ( right-hand bar ), by country

Research specialisation was closely aligned with Becher’s ( 1994 ) disciplinary typology of pure/theoretical and applied/pragmatic knowledge structures. Pure basic researchers were most common in the humanities (28 %), life sciences (22 %), social sciences (19 %) and physical sciences (18 %). These discipline-based differences were broadly consistent across country samples, with humanities ranked in the top 3 basic research disciplines in all countries other than Australia. Comparably, few pure basic researchers were located in Becher’s applied disciplines within the science-based and social professions, such as medicine (9 %), business studies (8 %), education (7 %), agriculture (4 %) and engineering (3 %). The balance between specialisation in basic or applied research also aligns with Becher’s typology, with few disciplines having a roughly equal number of pure applied and pure basic researchers. One possible exception may be law, where pure applied research was rare (10 %) compared to pure basic (18 %). This appears to contradict the practice orientation of the discipline. However, it may be that purely “practically oriented” research is defined differently by law academics, given that research within a legal practice involves direct remuneration for specific clients. The proportion of academics specialising in basic or applied research by discipline is shown in Fig.  3 (full breakdown by discipline in Table  6 of “ Appendix ”).

Proportion of academics engaged purely in basic/theoretical research ( left-hand bar ) and purely applied/practical research ( right-hand bar ), by discipline of current academic unit

Compared to the country-level results where pure applied researchers were only marginally more common than pure basic researchers, research orientation is considerably more fragmented across disciplines. This also supports Becher’s claims that disciplinary cultures often span national boundaries and embody collective norms. Taken together, the large differences across countries and disciplines suggest that claims regarding basic, theoretical or blue sky research should be nuanced with reference to national and disciplinary context.

Multinomial results

Our third research question was how we might account for individual-level differences in engagement and specialisation in basic and applied research. From the above results, the disciplinary implications are clear. Given that countries differ in their proportion of academics by discipline, cross-country comparisons need to control for these differences. However, significant variation within countries and disciplines suggests that other factors may also influence specialisation. To examine this further, we computed a multinomial logistic regression with three categorical outcomes: pure basic, pure applied and basic and applied as the reference category (merging the three categories which involved both types of research). Controlling for country and discipline, we investigated whether specialisation in basic or applied research was also associated with differences in access to commercial research funding, institutional expectations/policies and individual normative/social behaviour. We also checked whether the results differed when controlling for demographic characteristics (gender, age and age squared), but the main results did not change. The multinomial logistic regression results are presented in Table  3 .

The likelihood ratio tests from the multinomial regression results (not shown) indicated a statistically significant relationship between research specialisation and commercial research funding, organisational expectations and individual norms. However, organisational expectations for commercially oriented or applied research (institutional norms) were not a statistically significant factor differentiating between all categories of research specialisation. Compared to the reference category for those engaged in both basic and applied research, and holding other factors constant, a one unit increase in agreement (on a five-point scale) with the statement “Your institution emphasizes commercially-oriented or applied research” was only statistically significant in its negative association with being a pure basic researcher (with a decrease in the multinomial log odds of 0.15 per unit increase). Agreement with this statement was not significant in its relationship with being a pure applied researcher. In other words, institutional norms emphasising research commercialisation appear to increase engagement in applied research but not specialisation in this type of research. On the other hand, individual norms were significantly associated with both types of specialisation. A one unit increase in agreement with the statement that “Faculty in my discipline have a professional obligation to apply their knowledge to problems in society” was associated with an increased likelihood of being pure applied. Agreement was even more strongly associated with a decrease in the likelihood of being a pure basic researcher.

External commercial research funding was a significant differentiator for research specialisation, but mostly in its negative relationship with pure basic research specialisation. A one point percentage increase in the proportion of one’s research funding coming from business or government sources was associated with a small but statistically significant decrease in the likelihood of being a pure basic researcher. To a lesser extent, commercial research funding was also positively associated with pure applied research. In other words, commercial research funding tends to increase the likelihood of being engaged in applied research, but mostly in combination with basic research rather than in specialisation. This relatively minor relationship is partly due to the small share of academics for whom commercial funding is a main source of research funding. In most countries, the mean proportion of research funding from business and industry was around 5 % or less. However, in Germany and China, these proportions were considerably greater at 10 and 15 %, respectively (see Table  4 of “ Appendix ”). This is consistent with their high proportion of higher education R&D expenditure financed by industry, at 14 and 33 %, respectively, versus 6 % across all OECD countries (OECD 2013 ).

The control variables for country and discipline remained statistically significant in their relationship to research specialisation. Specialisation in pure basic or pure applied research was significant and negatively associated with being located in China and Malaysia (compared to the reference category of USA), which was to be expected given the aversion towards specialisation found in the descriptive results. The other regional patterns that remained significant were the greater likelihood of pure basic researchers to be located in the Western European countries of Italy, Norway, the Netherlands and Finland. Disciplinary differences continued to reflect Becher’s ( 1994 ) typologies. Pure basic researchers were significantly more likely to be located in the humanities, while pure applied researchers were significantly more likely to be located in engineering, agriculture, medicine and commerce.

In summary, pure basic researchers could be more clearly differentiated from others based on their research funding, professional norms and perceptions of institutional expectations, while pure applied researchers share more in common with those engaged in both basic and applied research.

Discussion and conclusion

Basic research is an activity that continues to define academic work at most research universities around the world. The majority of academics (61 %) in our data material based on more than 10,000 researchers from 15 countries report significant engagement in basic research, and very few report no engagement in basic research (7 %). Although these aggregate results mask considerable diversity across countries, there is little evidence that basic research is a minority preoccupation in any of the countries for which we have data. However, more academics are engaged in applied research than basic research. Those academics that engaged in both types did not do so equally, with more academics leaning towards applied over basic. This suggests there are some trade-offs between the two activities. Therefore, basic research may be considered to be an important part of most academics’ research, but often secondary to applied research. Our cross-sectional data do not allow us to investigate the extent to which theoretical research has declined from a dominant position, but the resilience of theoretical research lends stronger support to the more nuanced position of the triple helix model (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000 ). The shift towards Mode 2 or practical research appears to be emergent, rather than complete, with universities remaining a core producer of theoretical knowledge.

Our research generally supports Stokes ( 1997 ) since a main result is that combining basic and applied work is the norm for the majority of academics, regardless of country and discipline. It also supports earlier work claiming that traditional academic orientations remain strong in universities, even in periods of decreased core funding and increased pressure for various forms of societal engagement (Ylijoki et al. 2011 ). We still do not have sufficient evidence to conclude whether the frequent “hybrid profiles” of academics are productive and meaningful or whether they to a greater extent represent incommensurable activities leading to stress and insecurity (c.f. Davies 2013 ).

Disciplinary-based analyses showed basic research to be relatively weaker in the professional social science disciplines (e.g. business and education) and the applied sciences (engineering, agriculture and medicine). Academics within these disciplines were rarely primarily focused on theoretical research, but these patterns probably reflect the cognitive knowledge structures of these disciplines and their orientation towards practical outputs (Becher and Trowler 2001 ), rather than a weakening importance of theoretical research. The diversity within these disciplines also suggests that theoretical research can be an important, and even dominant, motivation. Highly practical results may be the starting point for conducting research in some applied disciplines, but academic prestige has a strong appeal for academics across various disciplines (Hakala and Ylijoki 2001 ). Nevertheless, with up to around one-third of academics in the applied sciences engaging purely in applied research, compared to less than one-fifth in other fields, a complete devotion towards practice orientated research is clearly more relevant in certain fields. This lends stronger support to the field-dependent interpretations offered by Weingart ( 1997 ) and Woolf ( 2008 ) in their competing frameworks for understanding changes to the science system.

Our cross-country results are less easy to explain and should be treated with caution due to the limitations of the data. The strong position of basic research in Finnish and Norwegian universities has been noted previously (see Ylijoki et al. 2011 ; Gulbrandsen and Kyvik 2010 ), but our international results from other countries suggest a more nuanced interpretation. Although more academics were significantly engaged in basic research than applied research in Norway and the Netherlands (with an equal division in Italy), these countries were the exceptions. Applied research dominated in most countries, particularly in Australia where academics were roughly twice as likely to specialise or lean towards applied research compared to basic research. This tendency was also noticeable in the USA and Hong Kong. One possibility is that applied research engagement reflects academic governance systems, with a stronger academic oligarchy protecting the place of basic research compared to market-driven systems (Clark 1983 ), but this was not consistent with results in all countries.

Institutional norms emphasising research commercialisation were weakest in Mexico, Argentina and Brazil, and relatively weaker in most European countries (see Table  4 of “ Appendix ”). This was consistent with traditional systems of bureaucratised governance within Latin American universities, which have been criticised for creating few incentives to engage in research commercialisation and research productivity more generally (Thorn and Soo 2006 ). However, although each of these institutional aspects differentiated between individuals within countries in consistent ways, the differences across countries remained. For example, strong institutional-level norms towards research commercialisation in the UK were not consistent with the rather moderate engagement in applied research in this country. Nor were weak commercialisation norms in Brazil and Argentina consistent with the moderate engagement in applied research and weak engagement in basic research. In Latin America, it has been claimed that university discourse has shifted enthusiastically towards Mode 2, but the academic evaluation system remains rooted in Mode 1 outputs, leading to an “evaluation system schizophrenia” (Arocena and Sutz 2001 , p. 1231). Engagement in basic and applied research clearly has strong country-level features, implying that generalised statements about basic or applied research must be qualified for local context.

China and Malaysia are particularly interesting countries because both applied research and basic research were strong self-characterisations. Neither country has strong university research traditions, but their respective governments have recently increased their expectations for basic research as part of innovation and development plans (Zhu and Gong 2008 ; Lee et al. 2013 ). Up until the mid-1980s, Chinese universities were predominantly teaching focused, receiving no specific funding for research. Basic research was the responsibility of the Chinese Academy of Science and other national research institutes, while applied research was conducted by research institutes in industrial sectors (Zhu and Gong 2008 ). Malaysian universities have also been largely teaching focused and lacked an academic research culture (Lee 2003 ). Strong engagement in both basic and applied research may reflect an emerging research culture which supports both basic and applied research. According to Mohrman et al. ( 2008 ), at the same time that Chinese institutions are encouraging basic research, universities are also responding to demands for applied research as a service to society. This appeared to translate into individual-level norms. Academics in these two countries were most likely to report stronger agreement that academics had a professional obligation to apply their knowledge to problems in society.

However, the results for China and Malaysia also highlight a broader difficulty in defining basic and applied research engagement. Even though we are confident that concepts of basic/theoretical research and applied/practically oriented research were understood in each country and the investigation teams went to great lengths to ensure translations were accurate and comparable, there is a risk that subtle differences in understanding might be responsible for parts of the differences across countries in responses. Academics in some countries may declare a greater engagement in basic research due to, for example, a broader definition of what “theoretical” or “practical” research means. This also goes beyond linguistic differences to general understanding, acceptance and reward structures for basic and applied research. The strong relationship between individual norms, institutional expectations and self-reported engagement in applied research could indicate that academics are responsive to institutional policies supporting applied research. Unfortunately, individuals may also simply exaggerate behaviours in accordance with what they perceive to be the norms of their discipline and institution. This has implications for the growing expectations of research “relevance” from higher education stakeholders around the world (Enders and Musselin 2008 ). If most academics genuinely believe they are already deeply engaged in practical research, it may indicate they hold a different understanding of applied and practically oriented research compared to the policy makers articulating the need for greater engagement.

We have shown that the emphasis on applied research is not only related to funding and university strategies; it is even more strongly related to individual norms about academics obligations. National and institutional policies for more applied and practically related activities are therefore not necessarily out of touch with core academic values. Our main finding is that different types of research activities are mixed and combined at the individual level, despite variations between countries and between academic disciplines. This does not imply that the balance between basic and applied research is equal, or that basic research has not lost its pre-eminence, but it does imply that basic research retains a core position within the research mind sets of most academics. As such, our results can be interpreted as a warning against policies striving for clear division in the higher education landscape between institutions primarily doing basic research and others applied. This seems out of touch with widely shared norms and practices among the researchers themselves, who overwhelming combine these activities.

Albert, M. (2003). Universities and the market economy: The differential impact on knowledge production in sociology and economics. Higher Education, 45 (2), 147–182.

Article   Google Scholar  

Altbach, P. G. (2001). Academic freedom: International realities and challenges. Higher Education, 41 (1–2), 205–219.

Arocena, R., & Sutz, J. (2001). Changing knowledge production and Latin American universities. Research Policy, 30 , 1221–1234.

Auranen, O., & Nieminen, M. (2010). University research funding and publication performance—An international comparison. Research Policy, 39 (6), 822–834. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.03.003 .

Becher, T. (1994). The significance of disciplinary differences. Studies in Higher Education, 19 (2), 151–161.

Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines . Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.

Google Scholar  

Calvert, J. (2006). What’s special about basic research. Science, Technology and Human Values, 31 , 199–220.

Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Clark, B. R. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response. Tertiary Education and Management, 4 (1), 5–16.

Cummings, W. K., & Finkelstein, M. J. (2012). 2. Concepts and methods. In W. K. Cummings & M. J. Finkelstein (Eds.), Scholars in the changing American Academy: New contexts, new rules, and new roles (pp. 15–26). Dordrecht: Springer.

Davies, S. (2013). Research staff and public engagement: A UK study. Higher Education, 66 (6), 725–739. doi: 10.1007/s10734-013-9631-y .

Enders, J. (2013). The university in the audit society: On accountability, trust and markets. In L. Engwall & P. Scott (Eds.), Trust in universities (pp. 53–62). London: Portland Press.

Enders, J., & Musselin, C. (2008). Back to the future? The academic professions in the 21st century. In Higher education to 2030: Demography (Vol. 1, pp. 125–150, Demography). Paris: OECD.

Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Research Policy, 27 (8), 823–833. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00093-6 .

Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29 (2), 109–123.

Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies . London: Sage.

Godin, B. (1998). Writing performative history: the new New Atlantis? Social Studies of Science, 28 (3), 465–483.

Gulbrandsen, M., & Kyvik, S. (2010). Are the concepts basic research, applied research and experimental development still useful? An empirical investigation among Norwegian academics. Science and Public Policy, 37 (5), 343–353.

Gulbrandsen, M., & Langfeldt, L. (2004). In search of Mode 2: The nature of knowledge production in Norway. Minerva, 42 , 237–250.

Hakala, J., & Ylijoki, O.-H. (2001). Research for whom? Research orientations in three academic cultures. Organization, 8 (2), 373–380. doi: 10.1177/1350508401082021 .

Hessels, L. K., & Van Lente, H. (2008). Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda. Research Policy, 37 (4), 740–760.

Irvine, J., & Martin, B. R. (1984). Foresight in science: Picking the winners . London: Pinter.

Kyvik, S. (2007). Changes in funding of university research. Consequences for problem choice and research output of academic staff. In J. Enders & B. Jongbloed (Eds.), Public–private dynamics in higher education: Expectations, developments and outcomes (pp. 387–411). Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.

Lee, M. N. N. (2003). The academic profession in Malaysia and Singapore: Between bureaucratic and corporate cultures. In P. G. Altbach (Ed.), The decline of the guru: The academic profession in the third world (pp. 135–166). Chestnut Hill: Boston College.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Lee, M. N. N., Sirat, M., Da, W. C., & Karpudewan, M. (2013). Appendix C: Effectiveness of research and innovation management at policy and institutional levels in Malaysia. In A. Olsson & L. Meek (Eds.), Effectiveness of Research and Innovation Management at Policy and Institutional Levels (pp. 90–120). Paris: OECD.

Mohrman, K., Ma, W., & Baker, D. (2008). The research university in transition: The emerging global model. Higher Education Policy, 21 (1), 5–27.

Mowery, D., & Sampat, B. (2005). The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), Universities in national innovation systems (pp. 209–239). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Musselin, C. (2005). European academic labor markets in transition. Higher Education, 49 (1–2), 135–154.

Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2003). Introduction: ‘Mode 2’ revisited: The new production of knowledge. Minerva, 41 (3), 179–194. doi: 10.1023/a:1025505528250 .

OECD. (2002). Frascati manual 2002: Proposed standard practice for surveys on research and experimental development . Paris: OECD.

Book   Google Scholar  

OECD. (2013). MSTI main science and technology indicators . Paris: OECD.

RIHE (Ed.). (2008). The changing academic profession in international comparative and quantitative perspectives (Vol. 12, RIHE International Seminar Reports). Hiroshima: Research Institute for Higher Education, Hiroshima University.

Rip, A. (2004). Strategic research, post-modern universities and research training. Higher Education Policy, 17 (2), 153–166.

Shinn, T. (2002). The triple helix and new production of knowledge prepackaged thinking on science and technology. Social Studies of Science, 32 (4), 599–614.

Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university . Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Stuart, T. E., & Ding, W. W. (2006). When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 112 (1), 97–144.

Thorn, K., & Soo, M. (2006). Latin American universities and the third mission: Trends, challenges, and policy options [Working Paper, no. 4002]. World Bank Policy Research . The World Bank.

Vabø, A., & Ramberg, I. (2009). Arbeidsvilkår i norsk forskning . Oslo: NIFU STEP.

van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research Policy, 40 (3), 463–472. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.11.001 .

Weingart, P. (1997). From “Finalization” to “Mode 2”: Old wine in new bottles? Social Science Information, 36 (4), 591–613.

Woolf, S. H. (2008). The meaning of translational research and why it matters. JAMA, 299 (2), 211–213.

Ylijoki, O.-H., Lyytinen, A., & Marttila, L. (2011). Different research markets: A disciplinary perspective. Higher Education, 62 (6), 721–740. doi: 10.1007/s10734-011-9414-2 .

Zhu, Z., & Gong, X. (2008). Basic research: Its impact on China’s future. Technology in Society, 30 (3–4), 293–298. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2008.05.001 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

LH Martin Institute, The University of Melbourne, Level 1, 715 Swanston Street, Carlton, VIC, 3010, Australia

Peter James Bentley

Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo, Postboks 1108, Blindern, 0317, Oslo, Norway

Magnus Gulbrandsen

NIFU Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education, P.O. Box 5183, Majorstuen, 0302, Oslo, Norway

Svein Kyvik

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter James Bentley .

See Tables  4 , 5 and 6 .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Bentley, P.J., Gulbrandsen, M. & Kyvik, S. The relationship between basic and applied research in universities. High Educ 70 , 689–709 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9861-2

Download citation

Published : 25 March 2015

Issue Date : October 2015

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9861-2

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Basic research
• Applied research
• Academic profession
• Academic work
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Customer Reviews
• Extended Essays
• IB Internal Assessment
• Theory of Knowledge
• Literature Review
• Dissertations
• Essay Writing
• Research Writing
• Assignment Help
• Capstone Projects
• College Application
• Online Class

Thesis Vs Dissertation: What Are The Differences Between Them?

by  Antony W

June 28, 2024

Many people use these terms thesis vs dissertation interchangeably to mean the same thing.

There are even education departments and academic institutions that use these terms differently, making them all the more confusing and therefore difficult to understand.

In this guide, you’ll learn about thesis vs dissertation so you know exactly what they mean when someone in your academic institution mentions the terms.

We’ll look at: 

• What a dissertation is
• What a thesis is
• The similarities between a thesis and a dissertation and
• The differences between a thesis and a dissertation

The primary difference between a dissertation and a thesis is the level at which a learner completes them. You’ll write a thesis if you enroll in a master’s degree courses and work on a dissertation to earn a doctoral degree.

You’ll have to do a lot of research and writing in both cases. And although the task can seem overwhelming, especially given the scope of the research and the length of the assignment, starting early can go a long way to help you finish a thesis or dissertation within the respective deadline.

What is a Dissertation in Academic Writing?

A dissertation is a written assignment that features original or expanded research by a PhD student on a new or existing topic. The doctoral student chooses the topic they would like to explore within their field of study, conducts their own original research, and then presents their results (findings) in writing.

There are two reasons why writing a dissertation is worth it . First, it proves the knowledge and research skills of a doctoral student. Second, it presents an opportunity for the student to add to the existing body of knowledge in their respective field.

The time to start working on a dissertation varies from institution to institution.

In some schools, students have to complete a doctoral course, sit through a series of examinations, and then spend at least 24 weeks writing the dissertation . Other schools integrate dissertation writing into the curriculum, allowing the doctoral to start their research early.

In dissertation writing, a student has the opportunity to present a hypothesis or a new theory in their field of research, which they can use to either disapprove or support a previously presented theory in existing research.

They also have the option to add to the existing research, in which case they have to consider a unique angle that can establish their research in a unique direction.

Perhaps the most intimidating part of working on a dissertation is the defense stage because you can’t be certain of the outcome.

However, you can work closely with the assigned committee throughout the writing process to point your research and writing in the right direction.

What is a Thesis in Academic Writing?

A thesis is an academic piece of writing done by students who wish to graduate from a Master’s degree program.

The purpose of writing a thesis is to examine whether students can express their knowledge within the subject they’ve been studying in their Master’s degree program.

Some universities require Master’s students to write undergraduate theses, but these tend to be shorter with less depth compared to the Master’s degree theses.

As with dissertation, thesis writing requires that a student choose a topic of their interest in their field of study.

The minor difference is that the topic has to be narrow. For example, if you’re taking a course in computer science, you might focus on a topic such as the effect of internet of things in textile industry.

Next, look into existing research on the topic and then use the knowledge gathered to construct an academic argument. You will finalize the process by using already existing research to prove your argument. 

Thesis vs Dissertation: What are the Similarities?

In dissertation and thesis writing, PhD and Master’s students have to choose topics to explore. We recommend that you choose a topic that interests you so you can have an easy time researching, writing, presenting, and defending your findings.

Thesis and dissertation writing requires a student to demonstrate their ability to think and express their view in writing.

Both assignments requires defense, in which case the selected committee asses a student’s ability to present their academic findings in their field of study.

Both assignments have specific deadlines that students have to observe. Start working on your thesis or dissertation early so you don’t end up making unnecessary excuses when it’s almost time to submit your work.

Thesis vs Dissertation: What Are The Differences?

The following table explains the difference between a thesis and a dissertation:

Final Thoughts on Dissertation vs Thesis

As you can see, the main difference between a thesis vs dissertation is the academic level at which students have to complete them. In other words, you will work on a thesis to earn a master’s degree and write a dissertation to earn a doctorate degree at the end of your academic year. 

Writing a thesis or dissertation shouldn’t be difficult either. That’s because your academic journey equips you with the knowledge necessary to write an authentic and comprehensive assignment.

The most important rule when it comes to doing such assignments is to start early. Never wait until it’s too late to start writing your thesis or dissertation. Last minute rush may work well for an essay, but it won’t be quite as effective for thesis or dissertation writing. 

We hope this guide clears the confusion on thesis vs dissertation. 

About the author 

Antony W is a professional writer and coach at Help for Assessment. He spends countless hours every day researching and writing great content filled with expert advice on how to write engaging essays, research papers, and assignments.