in for research purposes

Community Blog

Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.

What is Research? – Purpose of Research

• By DiscoverPhDs
• September 10, 2020

The purpose of research is to enhance society by advancing knowledge through the development of scientific theories, concepts and ideas. A research purpose is met through forming hypotheses, collecting data, analysing results, forming conclusions, implementing findings into real-life applications and forming new research questions.

What is Research

Simply put, research is the process of discovering new knowledge. This knowledge can be either the development of new concepts or the advancement of existing knowledge and theories, leading to a new understanding that was not previously known.

As a more formal definition of research, the following has been extracted from the Code of Federal Regulations :

While research can be carried out by anyone and in any field, most research is usually done to broaden knowledge in the physical, biological, and social worlds. This can range from learning why certain materials behave the way they do, to asking why certain people are more resilient than others when faced with the same challenges.

The use of ‘systematic investigation’ in the formal definition represents how research is normally conducted – a hypothesis is formed, appropriate research methods are designed, data is collected and analysed, and research results are summarised into one or more ‘research conclusions’. These research conclusions are then shared with the rest of the scientific community to add to the existing knowledge and serve as evidence to form additional questions that can be investigated. It is this cyclical process that enables scientific research to make continuous progress over the years; the true purpose of research.

What is the Purpose of Research

From weather forecasts to the discovery of antibiotics, researchers are constantly trying to find new ways to understand the world and how things work – with the ultimate goal of improving our lives.

The purpose of research is therefore to find out what is known, what is not and what we can develop further. In this way, scientists can develop new theories, ideas and products that shape our society and our everyday lives.

Although research can take many forms, there are three main purposes of research:

• Exploratory: Exploratory research is the first research to be conducted around a problem that has not yet been clearly defined. Exploration research therefore aims to gain a better understanding of the exact nature of the problem and not to provide a conclusive answer to the problem itself. This enables us to conduct more in-depth research later on.
• Descriptive: Descriptive research expands knowledge of a research problem or phenomenon by describing it according to its characteristics and population. Descriptive research focuses on the ‘how’ and ‘what’, but not on the ‘why’.
• Explanatory: Explanatory research, also referred to as casual research, is conducted to determine how variables interact, i.e. to identify cause-and-effect relationships. Explanatory research deals with the ‘why’ of research questions and is therefore often based on experiments.

Characteristics of Research

There are 8 core characteristics that all research projects should have. These are:

• Empirical  – based on proven scientific methods derived from real-life observations and experiments.
• Logical  – follows sequential procedures based on valid principles.
• Cyclic  – research begins with a question and ends with a question, i.e. research should lead to a new line of questioning.
• Controlled  – vigorous measures put into place to keep all variables constant, except those under investigation.
• Hypothesis-based  – the research design generates data that sufficiently meets the research objectives and can prove or disprove the hypothesis. It makes the research study repeatable and gives credibility to the results.
• Analytical  – data is generated, recorded and analysed using proven techniques to ensure high accuracy and repeatability while minimising potential errors and anomalies.
• Objective  – sound judgement is used by the researcher to ensure that the research findings are valid.
• Statistical treatment  – statistical treatment is used to transform the available data into something more meaningful from which knowledge can be gained.

Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.

Types of Research

Research can be divided into two main types: basic research (also known as pure research) and applied research.

Basic Research

Basic research, also known as pure research, is an original investigation into the reasons behind a process, phenomenon or particular event. It focuses on generating knowledge around existing basic principles.

Basic research is generally considered ‘non-commercial research’ because it does not focus on solving practical problems, and has no immediate benefit or ways it can be applied.

While basic research may not have direct applications, it usually provides new insights that can later be used in applied research.

Applied Research

Applied research investigates well-known theories and principles in order to enhance knowledge around a practical aim. Because of this, applied research focuses on solving real-life problems by deriving knowledge which has an immediate application.

Methods of Research

Research methods for data collection fall into one of two categories: inductive methods or deductive methods.

Inductive research methods focus on the analysis of an observation and are usually associated with qualitative research. Deductive research methods focus on the verification of an observation and are typically associated with quantitative research.

Qualitative Research

Qualitative research is a method that enables non-numerical data collection through open-ended methods such as interviews, case studies and focus groups .

It enables researchers to collect data on personal experiences, feelings or behaviours, as well as the reasons behind them. Because of this, qualitative research is often used in fields such as social science, psychology and philosophy and other areas where it is useful to know the connection between what has occurred and why it has occurred.

Quantitative Research

Quantitative research is a method that collects and analyses numerical data through statistical analysis.

It allows us to quantify variables, uncover relationships, and make generalisations across a larger population. As a result, quantitative research is often used in the natural and physical sciences such as engineering, biology, chemistry, physics, computer science, finance, and medical research, etc.

What does Research Involve?

Research often follows a systematic approach known as a Scientific Method, which is carried out using an hourglass model.

A research project first starts with a problem statement, or rather, the research purpose for engaging in the study. This can take the form of the ‘ scope of the study ’ or ‘ aims and objectives ’ of your research topic.

Subsequently, a literature review is carried out and a hypothesis is formed. The researcher then creates a research methodology and collects the data.

The data is then analysed using various statistical methods and the null hypothesis is either accepted or rejected.

In both cases, the study and its conclusion are officially written up as a report or research paper, and the researcher may also recommend lines of further questioning. The report or research paper is then shared with the wider research community, and the cycle begins all over again.

Although these steps outline the overall research process, keep in mind that research projects are highly dynamic and are therefore considered an iterative process with continued refinements and not a series of fixed stages.

An academic transcript gives a breakdown of each module you studied for your degree and the mark that you were awarded.

Learn more about using cloud storage effectively, video conferencing calling, good note-taking solutions and online calendar and task management options.

Reference management software solutions offer a powerful way for you to track and manage your academic references. Read our blog post to learn more about what they are and how to use them.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Browse PhDs Now

When you should and shouldn’t capitalise the names of chemical compounds and their abbreviations is not always clear.

The Thurstone Scale is used to quantify the attitudes of people being surveyed, using a format of ‘agree-disagree’ statements.

Bethany is a 1st year PhD student at the University of Bath, researching the adaptation of a self-help smartphone app (BlueIce) to prevent self-harm and improve the mood of University students.

Freya’s in the final year of her PhD at the University of Leeds. Her project is about improving the precision of observations between collocated ground-based weather radar and airborne platforms.

Join Thousands of Students

• Request new password
• Create a new account

Doing Research in Education: Theory and Practice

Student resources, 1. the purpose of research: why do we do it.

Select SAGE Journal articles are available to give you even more insight into chapter topics. These are also an ideal resource to help support your literature reviews, dissertations and assignments.

Click on the following links which will open in a new window.

Brace, M., Herriotts, P., Mccullagh, A. and Nzegwu, F. (2007) ‘Why research — what research should be done?: Report of a collaborative workshop in the UK to discuss social research priorities on visual impairment’, British Journal of Visual Impairment , 25(2): 178–189.

Hannah, D.R. and Lautsch, B.A. (2010) ‘Counting in Qualitative Research: Why to Conduct it, When to Avoid it, and When to Closet it’, in Journal of Management Inquiry , 20(1): 14–22.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

What Are Research Objectives and How to Write Them (with Examples)

Table of Contents

Introduction

Research is at the center of everything researchers do, and setting clear, well-defined research objectives plays a pivotal role in guiding scholars toward their desired outcomes. Research papers are essential instruments for researchers to effectively communicate their work. Among the many sections that constitute a research paper, the introduction plays a key role in providing a background and setting the context. 1 Research objectives, which define the aims of the study, are usually stated in the introduction. Every study has a research question that the authors are trying to answer, and the objective is an active statement about how the study will answer this research question. These objectives help guide the development and design of the study and steer the research in the appropriate direction; if this is not clearly defined, a project can fail!

Research studies have a research question, research hypothesis, and one or more research objectives. A research question is what a study aims to answer, and a research hypothesis is a predictive statement about the relationship between two or more variables, which the study sets out to prove or disprove. Objectives are specific, measurable goals that the study aims to achieve. The difference between these three is illustrated by the following example:

• Research question : How does low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) compare with a placebo device in managing the symptoms of skeletally mature patients with patellar tendinopathy?
• Research hypothesis : Pain levels are reduced in patients who receive daily active-LIPUS (treatment) for 12 weeks compared with individuals who receive inactive-LIPUS (placebo).
• Research objective : To investigate the clinical efficacy of LIPUS in the management of patellar tendinopathy symptoms.

This article discusses the importance of clear, well-thought out objectives and suggests methods to write them clearly.

What is the introduction in research papers?

Research objectives are usually included in the introduction section. This section is the first that the readers will read so it is essential that it conveys the subject matter appropriately and is well written to create a good first impression. A good introduction sets the tone of the paper and clearly outlines the contents so that the readers get a quick snapshot of what to expect.

A good introduction should aim to: 2,3

• Indicate the main subject area, its importance, and cite previous literature on the subject
• Define the gap(s) in existing research, ask a research question, and state the objectives
• Announce the present research and outline its novelty and significance
• Avoid repeating the Abstract, providing unnecessary information, and claiming novelty without accurate supporting information.

Why are research objectives important?

Objectives can help you stay focused and steer your research in the required direction. They help define and limit the scope of your research, which is important to efficiently manage your resources and time. The objectives help to create and maintain the overall structure, and specify two main things—the variables and the methods of quantifying the variables.

A good research objective:

• defines the scope of the study
• gives direction to the research
• helps maintain focus and avoid diversions from the topic
• minimizes wastage of resources like time, money, and energy

Types of research objectives

Research objectives can be broadly classified into general and specific objectives . 4 General objectives state what the research expects to achieve overall while specific objectives break this down into smaller, logically connected parts, each of which addresses various parts of the research problem. General objectives are the main goals of the study and are usually fewer in number while specific objectives are more in number because they address several aspects of the research problem.

Example (general objective): To investigate the factors influencing the financial performance of firms listed in the New York Stock Exchange market.

Example (specific objective): To assess the influence of firm size on the financial performance of firms listed in the New York Stock Exchange market.

In addition to this broad classification, research objectives can be grouped into several categories depending on the research problem, as given in Table 1.

Table 1: Types of research objectives

Characteristics of research objectives

Research objectives must start with the word “To” because this helps readers identify the objective in the absence of headings and appropriate sectioning in research papers. 5,6

• A good objective is SMART (mostly applicable to specific objectives):
• Specific—clear about the what, why, when, and how
• Measurable—identifies the main variables of the study and quantifies the targets
• Achievable—attainable using the available time and resources
• Realistic—accurately addresses the scope of the problem
• Time-bound—identifies the time in which each step will be completed
• Research objectives clarify the purpose of research.
• They help understand the relationship and dissimilarities between variables.
• They provide a direction that helps the research to reach a definite conclusion.

How to write research objectives?

Research objectives can be written using the following steps: 7

• State your main research question clearly and concisely.
• Describe the ultimate goal of your study, which is similar to the research question but states the intended outcomes more definitively.
• Divide this main goal into subcategories to develop your objectives.
• Limit the number of objectives (1-2 general; 3-4 specific)
• Assess each objective using the SMART
• Start each objective with an action verb like assess, compare, determine, evaluate, etc., which makes the research appear more actionable.
• Use specific language without making the sentence data heavy.
• The most common section to add the objectives is the introduction and after the problem statement.
• Add the objectives to the abstract (if there is one).
• State the general objective first, followed by the specific objectives.

Formulating research objectives

Formulating research objectives has the following five steps, which could help researchers develop a clear objective: 8

• Identify the research problem.
• Review past studies on subjects similar to your problem statement, that is, studies that use similar methods, variables, etc.
• Identify the research gaps the current study should cover based on your literature review. These gaps could be theoretical, methodological, or conceptual.
• Define the research question(s) based on the gaps identified.
• Revise/relate the research problem based on the defined research question and the gaps identified. This is to confirm that there is an actual need for a study on the subject based on the gaps in literature.
• Identify and write the general and specific objectives.
• Incorporate the objectives into the study.

Advantages of research objectives

Adding clear research objectives has the following advantages: 4,8

• Maintains the focus and direction of the research
• Optimizes allocation of resources with minimal wastage
• Acts as a foundation for defining appropriate research questions and hypotheses
• Provides measurable outcomes that can help evaluate the success of the research
• Determines the feasibility of the research by helping to assess the availability of required resources
• Ensures relevance of the study to the subject and its contribution to existing literature

Disadvantages of research objectives

Research objectives also have few disadvantages, as listed below: 8

• Absence of clearly defined objectives can lead to ambiguity in the research process
• Unintentional bias could affect the validity and accuracy of the research findings

Key takeaways

• Research objectives are concise statements that describe what the research is aiming to achieve.
• They define the scope and direction of the research and maintain focus.
• The objectives should be SMART—specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound.
• Clear research objectives help avoid collection of data or resources not required for the study.
• Well-formulated specific objectives help develop the overall research methodology, including data collection, analysis, interpretation, and utilization.
• Research objectives should cover all aspects of the problem statement in a coherent way.
• They should be clearly stated using action verbs.

Frequently asked questions on research objectives

Q: what’s the difference between research objectives and aims 9.

A: Research aims are statements that reflect the broad goal(s) of the study and outline the general direction of the research. They are not specific but clearly define the focus of the study.

Example: This research aims to explore employee experiences of digital transformation in retail HR.

Research objectives focus on the action to be taken to achieve the aims. They make the aims more practical and should be specific and actionable.

Example: To observe the retail HR employees throughout the digital transformation.

Q: What are the examples of research objectives, both general and specific?

A: Here are a few examples of research objectives:

• To identify the antiviral chemical constituents in Mumbukura gitoniensis (general)
• To carry out solvent extraction of dried flowers of Mumbukura gitoniensis and isolate the constituents. (specific)
• To determine the antiviral activity of each of the isolated compounds. (specific)
• To examine the extent, range, and method of coral reef rehabilitation projects in five shallow reef areas adjacent to popular tourist destinations in the Philippines.
• To investigate species richness of mammal communities in five protected areas over the past 20 years.
• To evaluate the potential application of AI techniques for estimating best-corrected visual acuity from fundus photographs with and without ancillary information.
• To investigate whether sport influences psychological parameters in the personality of asthmatic children.

Q: How do I develop research objectives?

A: Developing research objectives begins with defining the problem statement clearly, as illustrated by Figure 1. Objectives specify how the research question will be answered and they determine what is to be measured to test the hypothesis.

Q: Are research objectives measurable?

A: The word “measurable” implies that something is quantifiable. In terms of research objectives, this means that the source and method of collecting data are identified and that all these aspects are feasible for the research. Some metrics can be created to measure your progress toward achieving your objectives.

Q: Can research objectives change during the study?

A: Revising research objectives during the study is acceptable in situations when the selected methodology is not progressing toward achieving the objective, or if there are challenges pertaining to resources, etc. One thing to keep in mind is the time and resources you would have to complete your research after revising the objectives. Thus, as long as your problem statement and hypotheses are unchanged, minor revisions to the research objectives are acceptable.

Q: What is the difference between research questions and research objectives? 10

Q: Are research objectives the same as hypotheses?

A: No, hypotheses are predictive theories that are expressed in general terms. Research objectives, which are more specific, are developed from hypotheses and aim to test them. A hypothesis can be tested using several methods and each method will have different objectives because the methodology to be used could be different. A hypothesis is developed based on observation and reasoning; it is a calculated prediction about why a particular phenomenon is occurring. To test this prediction, different research objectives are formulated. Here’s a simple example of both a research hypothesis and research objective.

Research hypothesis : Employees who arrive at work earlier are more productive.

Research objective : To assess whether employees who arrive at work earlier are more productive.

To summarize, research objectives are an important part of research studies and should be written clearly to effectively communicate your research. We hope this article has given you a brief insight into the importance of using clearly defined research objectives and how to formulate them.

• Farrugia P, Petrisor BA, Farrokhyar F, Bhandari M. Practical tips for surgical research: Research questions, hypotheses and objectives. Can J Surg. 2010 Aug;53(4):278-81.
• Abbadia J. How to write an introduction for a research paper. Mind the Graph website. Accessed June 14, 2023. https://mindthegraph.com/blog/how-to-write-an-introduction-for-a-research-paper/
• Writing a scientific paper: Introduction. UCI libraries website. Accessed June 15, 2023. https://guides.lib.uci.edu/c.php?g=334338&p=2249903
• Research objectives—Types, examples and writing guide. Researchmethod.net website. Accessed June 17, 2023. https://researchmethod.net/research-objectives/#:~:text=They%20provide%20a%20clear%20direction,track%20and%20achieve%20their%20goals .
• Bartle P. SMART Characteristics of good objectives. Community empowerment collective website. Accessed June 16, 2023. https://cec.vcn.bc.ca/cmp/modules/pd-smar.htm
• Research objectives. Studyprobe website. Accessed June 18, 2023. https://www.studyprobe.in/2022/08/research-objectives.html
• Corredor F. How to write objectives in a research paper. wikiHow website. Accessed June 18, 2023. https://www.wikihow.com/Write-Objectives-in-a-Research-Proposal
• Research objectives: Definition, types, characteristics, advantages. AccountingNest website. Accessed June 15, 2023. https://www.accountingnest.com/articles/research/research-objectives
• Phair D., Shaeffer A. Research aims, objectives & questions. GradCoach website. Accessed June 20, 2023. https://gradcoach.com/research-aims-objectives-questions/
• Understanding the difference between research questions and objectives. Accessed June 21, 2023. https://board.researchersjob.com/blog/research-questions-and-objectives

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

Research in Shorts: R Discovery’s New Feature Helps Academics Assess Relevant Papers in 2mins 

How Does R Discovery’s Interplatform Capability Enhance Research Accessibility 

Research: Meaning and Purpose

• First Online: 27 October 2022

Cite this chapter

• Kazi Abusaleh 4 &
• Akib Bin Anwar 5  

3052 Accesses

The objective of the chapter is to provide the conceptual framework of the research and research process and draw the importance of research in social sciences. Various books and research papers were reviewed to write the chapter. The chapter defines ‘research’ as a deliberate and systematic scientific investigation into a phenomenon to explore, analyse, and predict about the issues or circumstances, and characterizes ‘research’ as a systematic and scientific mode of inquiry, a way to testify the existing knowledge and theories, and a well-designed process to answer questions in a reliable and unbiased way. This chapter, however, categorizes research into eight types under four headings, explains six steps to carry out a research work scientifically, and finally sketches the importance of research in social sciences.

Download chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Research Design and Methodology

Research Questions and Research Design

Looking Back

• Research process
• Social science
• Systematic scientific investigation

Introduction

In nature, people are curious about unknown, unexplained, and uncertain issues, e.g., why summer is hotter than winter? Why does juvenile delinquency increase due to urbanization? How migrants’ remittance contributes to the national economy of developing countries? What measures are needed to tackle or cope up with immense traffic jams in megacities and ensure road safety? To search for the answers to these issues, people are using distinct systematic methods and applying innovative techniques. Thus, people around the world have been striving to explore, analyse, and predict the unknown, uncertain and unexplained phenomena using both theoretical and analytical skills, scientific as well as non-scientific, and indigenous methods and/or sources of knowledge, e.g., customs, traditions, taboos, rituals, mythology, supernatural, etc., to get answers (Aminuzzaman, 1991 ). With the advance of knowledge of the scientific investigation, people have become more rational, logical, systematic, and scientific to investigate issues to get answers.

Research is the systematic scientific inquiry into a phenomenon. Research is an endeavour where a systematic investigation is undertaken to discover the truth regarding the question. There are two main building blocks of research, inquisitiveness, and dissatisfaction (Ghosh, 1985 ). The inquisitiveness and dissatisfaction of the mind make the researcher curious and analytically passionate in dissecting the question and searching and researching the elucidation of the phenomenon. Thus, research helps to find the answers of inquisitive and dissatisfactory minds through a systematic scientific investigation. The scientific investigation is designed in a manner that is likely to answer the identified question in a reliable and unbiased way (Selltiz et al., 1976 ). Before inquiring into a phenomenon, however, a researcher must have prior knowledge or dive into the existing literature regarding the phenomenon, a thorough mind, and related facts and apposite modus operandi (Ghosh, 1985 ). There are three broad dimensions of research output, e.g., a research problem may come to light with the desire of an inquisitive mind to know the issue only; to acquire knowledge onto the issue for useful purposes, or to make a holistic intervention to generate knowledge for future use and intervention (Aminuzzaman, 1991 ).

The world goes through a process of continuous changes. Research is carried out based on some problems or facts. With the continuous process of change, the nature of problems also changes and is presented to us with a more sophisticated appearance. In this case, the research examines the extent of the validity of old facts and conclusions, i.e., crosscheck with the findings of previous studies and thus, deduce into new facts, contexts, and generalizations about the existing one. Aminuzzaman ( 1991 ) depicts that research, however, functionally, attempts to

Add new knowledge and generalize with old facts.

Compare the old conclusions with the new data.

Generalize one conclusion from the searched same set of data.

Generate a new original idea or theory, or unknown horizon of knowledge.

Trace out and find solutions to the existing contradictions in the study areas.

Research: A Conceptual Meaning

The term ‘research’ was first recorded in 1577 and first used in 1593 (Narayana et al., 2018 ). The term ‘research’ originated from the Middle French ‘recherche’, the meaning of which is ‘to drive for searching’. The word ‘recherche’ itself, however, came from the Old French ‘recerchier’, meaning ‘search’. By dissecting the word ‘research’, we mainly get “re + search”, i.e., search over and over again based on changing context. From a greater sense, ‘research’ can be defined as a deliberate and repeated search for specific purposes. Different dictionaries define the term ‘research’ from different perspectives. The term ‘research’ is defined by the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary ( 2020 ) as the collection of data about a particular subject or careful investigation and/or scientific experimentation aiming at analysing and interpreting facts, modifying existing theories, models/approaches, and laws based on facts, and the application of these theories, models, and laws/policies in the practical field. The Oxford Learner’s Online Dictionaries ( 2020 ) defines research as a scientific investigation into a subject to unearth new facts or evidence about it. Research, however, can be defined as a deliberate and systematic scientific investigation into a phenomenon to explore, analyse, and predict the issue. Scholars defined the term ‘research’ from different angles. Some of the referred definitions are as follows:

Types and Characteristics of Research

Research produces new knowledge or justifies existing knowledge. Researchers classify researches from different angles. Kothari ( 2004 ) divides research into four categories, e.g., descriptive vs. analytical; applied vs. fundamental; qualitative and quantitative; and conceptual vs. empirical. Kumar ( 2011 ), however, classified research (Fig. 2.1 ) from three broad categories, e.g., (a) applicability of research findings; (b) objectives of the study; and (c) mode of inquiry used in conducting the study.

Types of research. Sources : Adapted from Kumar ( 2011 )

Research can be classified into two categories considering its nature and applicability, e.g., basic/pure/fundamental research and applied research. Applied research further can be categorized as action research and evaluative research. Apart from these, research can broadly be classified into five types, e.g., exploratory, explanatory, experimental, evaluative, and descriptive research. From the methodological perspective, research can be further categorized into two types, e.g., qualitative and quantitative research. Based on the above discussions, the chapter classifies research as follows:

Basic research and applied research.

Qualitative research and quantitative research.

Action research and evaluative research.

Exploratory research and explanatory research.

Basic and Applied Research

Basic research is usually carried out to develop a new theoretical base and logical foundation of a particular discipline (Aminuzzaman, 1991 ). Kerlinger ( 1964 ) defines ‘basic research as research that is carried out to test a specific theory or to investigate relations among phenomena with little or no hope of applications of research results into practical problems. Connaway and Power ( 2010 ) define basic research as the pure, scientific, or theoretical research that is carried out to generate new knowledge, and the investigation is indirectly involved with how the generated knowledge will be applied in practical, specific, or real problems. Thus, basic research aims at the generalization and formulation of new theories and principles (Kothari, 2004 ). Basic research helps to understand theories, universal laws, and principles with less emphasis on their immediate practical uses.

On the other hand, ‘applied research’ is carried out for practical purposes, e.g., to generate findings, recommend long and short-term interventions. Applied research emphasizes solving a specific problem in real situations (Connaway and Power, 2010 ). This type of research is usually carried out to acquire knowledge to control natural phenomena (Polansky, 1960 ) and applied to find out the means how to resolute any immediate problem faced by the people of society, community, state, or organization (Kothari, 2004 ). For instance, applied research can be carried out on issues related to population dividends, begging, child labour, or poverty, and the purpose of the research will be to initiate programmes and policies.

Qualitative and Quantitative Research

Qualitative research is carried out with the qualitative phenomena to understand human behaviour or motivations or attitude. Qualitative research is focused on the qualitative aspect that is relating to or involves quality or kind (Mishra, 2017 ). This type of research is carried out in the behavioural sciences to understand the motive of human behaviour, e.g., how people behave in a particular situation and why (Kothari, 2004 ). To understand a phenomenon, however, qualitative research looks at the whole picture rather than breaking it down into variables as its goal is to get a holistic view rather than a numeric analysis of data (Ary et al., 2010 ). On the contrary, quantitative research can be defined as the systematic empirical investigation of discernible phenomena via numerical, statistical, or computational techniques (Given, 2008 ). This type of research is based on the aspect of quantity or extent of any phenomenon (Mishra, 2017 ) and is carried out, for example, to measure the level of poverty, to understand the economic profile of a particular community.

Action Research and Evaluative Research

Action research is a way to bring the utmost outcome of an ongoing social action or cycle of actions taken by an organization, community, or state to address a particularly problematic situation, e.g., policy, practice, and plan of action (Herr & Anderson, 2014 ). Greenwood and Levin ( 2007 ) define action research as a strategy that generates knowledge to promote the way of analysing and advancing the society and to take initiatives for democratic social action. This type of research, however, is carried out to enhance the efficacy of a programme or increase the popularity of a programme among people through awareness. On the contrary, evaluative research is a process of systematic investigation to assess the value or amount of success in achieving any pre-determined goals. Suchman ( 1968 ) describes that evaluative research includes at least four steps: (a) defining a goal, (b) defining appropriate criteria to be used in assessing success, (c) determination and describing the level of success, and (d) recommendations for further development of the programme. Adams ( 1975 ) defines evaluative research as a process to measure whether a process or event or situation is better than the other. More precisely, evaluative research is the systematic assessment of the achievement of an effort in comparison with the invested time, money, and hard work. This type of research, however, is carried out to assess the immediate, mid-term, and long-term outcomes of any programmatic intervention or any implemented activities to a particular community.

Exploratory Research and Explanatory Research

Exploratory research is carried out to explore an area about which too little is known to us (Kumar, 2011 ). Exploratory research, however, is an attempt that is made to develop an understanding and common familiarity with a phenomenon. Researchers usually carry out this type of research to satisfy their inquisitiveness and craving for enhanced understanding, testify the practicability of planned rigorous research, and explore more extensive information regarding the phenomenon (Aminuzzaman, 1991 ). In general, exploratory research is conducted in such a situation when a researcher does not know much about any problem or event and needs to know additional information or new and more recent information about the problem or phenomenon (Burns, 2006 ).

On the contrary, explanatory research establishes a relationship between one or more dependent variables with one or more independent variables. Explanatory research is defined as the attempt to understand the cause and effect relationship between two phenomena, e.g., why a stressful living causes a heart attack? How is melting glaciers affecting the environment? Explanatory research is carried out to find any problem or phenomenon that was not studied in-depth before. It does not give us any conclusive evidence, instead of assisting us in understanding the problem more efficiently.

Characteristics of Research

Research is characterized by a systematic investigation that is carried out to come across the solution of a problem in a reliable and unbiased way. Research not only produces new knowledge but also justifies existing knowledge. Best and Khan ( 1986 in Gebremedhin and Tweeten, 1994 ) summarized the characteristics of research as follows:

Research is carried out aiming to find solutions to a problem or the search for answers to unsolved questions.

Research paves the way to develop principles, laws, or theories useful in predicting future corrections.

Observable experience and/or empirical evidence are the basis of research. It comprises the collection of new (e.g., survey) data from primary sources and/or reviewing existing (secondary) data from verified sources.

Research demands valuable, precise, and genuine observation and description by using quantitative measures where possible.

The research strives to be objective and logical, applying appropriate tests to validate the procedures employed. In research, the researcher carefully documents references, collects data, analyses results, and reaches a conclusion.

Leedy ( 1981 ) has summarized six distinct features of research which are somehow in addition to Best and Khan. Leedy’s summarized features of research are

As an investigative process, it originates with a question. It attempts to satisfy an unanswered question that is in the mind of a researcher.

Research demands a clear articulation of a goal, and a clear statement of the problem is a pre-condition of any research.

In its due course of an inquiry, research sub-divides the principle problem into appropriate and more manageable sub-problems. Each sub-problem seeks answers through tentative constructs called a hypothesis. These hypotheses direct the researcher to collect and examine facts.

The research looks for facts directed by the hypothesis and guided by the problem. The facts are collected, organized, and processed through a systematic methodological approach.

In its analysis, research endorses solid and measurable data and information to attempt resolving the issue that the research initiates.

Research, by its nature, is a circulatory process. It interprets the meaning of the facts which leads to the resolution of a problem accepting or rejecting the hypothesis and providing answers to the question which began the research cycle.

Research is a scientific investigation into a phenomenon aiming to find out the ins and outs of the phenomena and solutions. Research, according to our understanding, has the following characteristics:

The research follows a systematic and scientific process to investigate a phenomenon.

Research is designed in such a manner that is likely to answer a question in an unbiased and in a reliable way.

Research either produces new knowledge and theory questioning the old one or provides new facts about the existing one.

Research scientifically address a problem to find out the solutions.

Research is usually carried out based on some tentative assumptions or hypotheses that are put to be tested throughout research.

The findings of the research may answer the questions either quantitatively or qualitatively or through a mixed-method approach (both qualitative and quantitative).

Research Process

Research is carried out following some specific systemic scientific steps. Ghosh, ( 1985 ), however, summarized several related steps, e.g., formulation of the problem concerning the purpose and objective of the study, description of research design, the methods of data collection, findings of the study, and policy implications and the conclusions. On the other hand, Adams and Schvaneveldt ( 1991 ) mentioned seven steps of research, e.g., (1) a statement of the problem, (2) a reduction or refinement of the problem occurs, (3) research design is formulated and mapped out for use, (4) ways to obtain relevant data are developed, tested, and made ready for use, (5) collection of data following research rules, (6) the data are analysed, and results are interpreted, and (7) the findings are typically written in a report. However, Bhattacherjee ( 2012 ) explained the process of research from three broader perspectives, e.g., explorative, research design, and research execution (Fig.  2.2 ). The chapter, however, defines six steps of the research process as follows:

Source : Adapted from Bhattacherjee ( 2012 )

Steps of research.

Identification of a research problem

A study is taken in hand when a researcher faces difficulties or challenges or dissatisfactions in his/her mind. Researchers usually become curious to carry out research when they find gaps in existing knowledge, envisage countering the contradictory findings of previous research, and/or think of generating new knowledge and theory explaining the unexplained issues. Hence, the very first work of a researcher is to find a research problem before searching the solution scientifically. Though it seems too easy to define a research problem, the summed up experience of scientists shows that it is more difficult to find and determine an appropriate research problem than to solve it. Hence, it is not logical to identify a problem sub-consciously. Identified research problems must be practical in the eye of theory and application. The identified problem must pose a realization in mind that there is a gap in knowledge in the existing literature. It is expected that the identified problem will be precise and investigable and measurable in a scientific manner. To deal with the identified problem, a researcher must go through the existing literature to acquire in-depth knowledge and determine the practicability of research.

Review of relevant literature and theories

Literature review paves the way to have deep insights and clear perspectives of the identified research project, and it beholds significant importance in the research field. A literature review involves searching, reading, and assessing research reports as well as casual observation and opinion reports that are pertinent to the planned research project of the researcher (Borg & Gall, 1963 ). A literature review helps to reduce the research work to a manageable size. Pertinent literature includes books, journal articles, working papers, review articles, periodicals, and so on. A literature review is done with threefold purposes, e.g., to enquire into the current status of available knowledge regarding the research area; to identify the main articles and their authors, theories and their proponents, and existing findings; and to identify the gaps in knowledge (Bhattacherjee, 2012 ). Literature review, however, serves the same purpose as a road map of a travel guide for an excursion and provides base information to research in an organized manner (Adams & Schvaneveldt, 1985 ). There are seven stages of literature review as explained by Adams and Schvaneveldt ( 1991 ), e.g., consulting with writers, researchers, academicians, and colleagues and friends to get a long list of books, journal articles, periodicals, and so on as they are great documentation resources; secondly, collecting information about the locations of libraries where these resources will be found; thirdly, tracking down references and locating essential literature; fourthly, going through the identified materials in an illustrative way and take notes; fifthly, re-reading the taken notes and reshuffle literature; sixthly, writing down the first draft of literature review through editing and polishing from the taken notes; and finally, finalizing the reviewed literature with cited references .

Formulation of research design

Upon having a rigorous literature review, the researcher needs to develop a research design. A study design is the blueprint of research that involves the researcher’s plan about the research procedures, sampling, data collection methods and techniques, and guides the researcher to research on time without the waste of resources. Research design includes justified research methods, data collection tools, research locations, sampling, operational definitions, and research ethics. In this stage, the researcher decides what research methods he/she will apply in his research to explore and get the research questions’ answers. Research methods may either be qualitative, e.g., case research or action research or ethnographic research; or quantitative research, e.g., survey research or experiments. After defining research methods, the researcher needs to define the tools of data collection, e.g., if the survey, whether data will be collected through face-to-face interviews of respondents by using structured or semi-structured survey questionnaire, or mail survey or telephone survey or web survey, and if case research or ethnographic research, data whether will be collected through face-to-face interview or telephone interview using the checklist. The researcher must also define the research population and area/locations to carry out the research scientifically, e.g., in what locations the study will be carried out, whether only male or female will be interviewed or the both; how many people will be interviewed; how those areas and respondents will be chosen, and what will be the sampling strategy, e.g., whether probability sampling or non-probability sampling strategy will be chosen. In this stage, the researcher also needs to identify the ethical guidelines he/she will follow to ensure his/her research’s validity and reliability.

Development of questionnaire and execution of field research

Based on the overall knowledge gained through the journey of the research and reviewing the literature, at this stage, the researcher will need to develop a questionnaire and/or a checklist/checklists that will answer the research objectives. Upon the development of the questionnaire and/or checklists, the first and foremost duty of the researcher will be to test the applicability of the questionnaire. This can be done through various processes, e.g., loud test, experts’ review, pilot test, etc. Usually, researchers prefer pilot testing which refers to conducting a shorter version of a full-length study that is carried out to justify the feasibility of the questionnaire. The questionnaire is modified and upgraded once the pilot study is done successfully. At this stage, the researcher directly goes to the fields, or orients data collectors on the final questionnaire and sends them to the specified field to collect data. To ensure the reliability of the collected data, researchers very often check and monitor the data collection process in a systematic way in the field.

Analysis of collected data and results interpretation

Heaps of collected data are useless unless the collected data are organized and analysed systematically to produce answers to the research question. Analysis means categorizing, ordering, manipulating, and summarizing data to find the answer to the problem (Kerlinger, 1964 ). The objective of analysing data is to summarize the collected data and observations in such a manner that yields the answer to the research question. Data collected from the field may be either qualitative or quantitative or a mixed approach of qualitative and quantitative based on the research design. Based on the research design, the analysis and interpretation of data will be either qualitative (e.g., coding or content analysis) or quantitative (e.g., application of statistical analysis, for example, use of statistical package for social sciences for correlation or regression analysis) or both.

Preparation of research report and policy implication

The final phase of the research work is to prepare the research report. The research report covers the entire research process, including proposal, methods followed in carrying out the research, ethical guidelines followed in carrying out the research, and presentation of findings of the investigation. The final task of the research report is to provide some guidelines answering the question of research or draw a conclusion assessing the derived inferences are either scientifically acceptable or not.

Importance of Research in Social Sciences

Social science is a broad category of academic discipline that is concerned with society and human relationships. The principal subject areas of social sciences are sociology, social work, political science, psychology, economics, development studies, anthropology, history, and archaeology. Social science research, however, entails investigating all aspects of human activity and interactivity (Black, 1993 ). Empirical social science research involves the collection of data about people and their social contexts drawing inferences from these disciplines (Somekh & Lewin, 2004 ), e.g., broad categories of societal relations are studied under sociology, human behaviour under psychology, interpretation of cultures under anthropology, local and international politics and political psychology under political science, and a broad range of social problems and welfare activities under social work.

Social science researchers are known as modern social engineers. Social scientists, through different action and operation research, develop a kind of sound knowledge base. Research in social sciences involves designing and developing different models, approaches, tools and techniques, and theories and procedures in analysing the web hub of society, and human inter-relationships and complexities (Aminuzzaman, 1991 ). Besides, social science research helps to understand social cohesion and has realistic inferences on formal and informal types of leadership, prototypes of behaviour, and reorganization in different spheres of society. In addition, social science research gives us numerous types of information that influence the economic and social well-being of aggregated individuals. In the agricultural field, for instance, management information derived from applied economic research includes ability, configuration, and processing locations of plants; efficient use of input materials, e.g., resources, lands, and fertilizers; the growth and use of innovative marketing mechanisms, i.e., choices, threats, and possibilities; and the incorporation of new information and technology, and so on (Smith, 1998 ).

Data and systematic information are the most essential prerequisite materials to make any plan or policy, whether it is within the organizational level or at the state level. Social science research portrays a comprehensive picture and agglomerates a broad range of data on the socioeconomic conditions and people’s demands at the local as well as national level. By providing aggregated data, social science research helps a nation to formulate specific development goals, plan, policy, and strategy in one hand and capacitate them to attain set development goals, e.g., Sustainable Development Goals, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, and sector-wise goals through using limited resources more efficiently on the other. Hence, in some cases, social science research is commissioned by the state and run by government offices. The Planning Ministry of Bangladesh, for instance, has a large research wing named Social Science Research Council (SSRC), and every year, they circulate and allot a good amount of money for research purposes. To an extent, social science research addresses the operational effectiveness of government organizations and helps to renovate innovative methods to ensure productivity within those agencies (Smith, 1998 ).

One of the primary functions of social science research is to find the relationships between two or more variables to predict the future (Aminuzzaman, 1991 ). Modern researchers use both qualitative as well as quantitative methods and analyse existing literature containing data, numerical as well qualitative, to find the inter-relationships of variables (Black, 1993 ). Thus, they examine present dynamics and predict the future trend and movement of an issue. Research in social sciences, to conclude, bears great importance as it helps to understand human behaviour, produce new knowledge and theories to understand social dynamics, aggregate data analysing social circumstances and contribute to initiating plan and policy, and predict future trends and movements of circumstances.

Conclusions

From immemorial time, people are always inherently curious to know about unknown, unexplained, and unpredictable issues. The unsatisfactory mind of people made them curious to search and research into these unknown, unexplained, and uncertain issues through both scientific as well as non-scientific means. Research, however, has introduced a systematic and scientific approach to investigate, analyse, and scientifically predict these issues. It does not merely produce quantitative data, but also analyse human behaviour through a qualitative approach and thus pave a new direction and insight into the existing dilemmas. Research is carried out either to produce new knowledge and develop theory, to test existing knowledge and theory, or to find the solution to an identified problem. To do so, the researcher follows a specific scientific approach very strictly to produce reliable and unbiased results from the very beginning of a research project to the very end, e.g., identification of a problem, review of pertinent literature, development of research proposal, carrying out field research, analysis of data, and reporting. Thus, the overall finding of research will help to generate new knowledge, testifying theory, and/or adding facts to formulate policy and plan, and understanding future trends and movements of circumstances made through predictions.

Adams, G. R., & Schvaneveldt, J. D. (1991). Understanding research methods . Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd.

Google Scholar  

Adams, G., & Schvaneveldt, J. (1985). Obtaining Data: Questionnaire and Interview. Understanding research methods (pp. 199–229). Longman.

Adams, S. (1975). Evaluative research in corrections: A practical guide. US Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice.

Aminuzzaman, S. M. (1991). Introduction to social research . Bangladesh publishers.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. K. (2010). Introduction to research in education (8th ed.). Wardsworth.

Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (1986). Research in education (5th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social science research: Principles, methods, and practices . University of South Florida.

Black, T. R. (1993). Evaluating social science research: An introduction . Sage.

Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1963). Educational research: An introduction . David McKay Company.

Burns, A. C. (2006). Marketing research. Pearson Education.

Connaway, L. S., & Powell, R. R. (2010). Basic research methods for librarians . ABC-CLIO.

Cresswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating qualitative and quantitative research (4th ed.). Merrill & Prentice Hall.

Gebremedhin, T. G., & Tweeten, L. G. (1994). Research methods and communication in the social sciences . ABC-CLIO.

Ghosh, B. N. (1985). Scientific method and social research . Stwiling Publishers/Advent Books Division.

Given, L. M. (Ed.). (2008). The Sage encyclopaedia of qualitative research methods . Sage publications.

Greenwood, D. J., & Levin, M. (2007). Introduction to action research: Social research for social change (2 nd ed.). SAGE publications.

Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2014). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty . Sage publications.

Kerlinger, F. N. (1964). Foundation behavioural approach . Rinehart & Winston.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques . New Age International (P) Limited Publishers.

Kumar, R. (2011). Selecting a method of data collection’. Research methodology: a step by step guide for beginners (3 rd ed.). Sage.

Leedy, P. D. (1981). How to read research and understand it . Macmillan.

Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2015). Practical research: planning and design (11th ed.). Global Edition.

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (2020). Merriam-Webster. Retrieved April 25, 2020 from www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/research

Mishra, D. S. (2017). Handbook of research methodology: A Compendium for scholars & researchers . Educreation Publishing.

Narayana, P. S., Varalakshmi, D., Pullaiah, T., & Rao, K. S. (2018). Research methodology in Zoology. Scientific Publishers.

Oxford Learner’s Online Dictionaries (2020). Oxford University Press. Retrieved April 25, 2020 from www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/research_1?q=research

Polansky, N. A. (Ed.). (1960). Social work research: methods for the helping professions . University of Chicago Press.

Selltiz, C., Wrightsman, L. S., & Cook, S. W. (1976). Research methods in social relations . Holt.

Smith, V. H. (1998). Measuring the benefits of social science research (Vol. 2, pp. 01–21). International Food Policy Research Institute.

Somekh, B., & Lewin, C. (2004). Research Methods in the Social Sciences . Sage Publications.

Suchman, E. (1968). Evaluative Research: Principles and Practice in Public Service and Social Action Programs . Russell Sage Foundation.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB), Dhanmondi, Dhaka, 1209, Bangladesh

Kazi Abusaleh

Community Mobilization Manager, Winrock International, Dhaka, 1212, Bangladesh

Akib Bin Anwar

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kazi Abusaleh .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Centre for Family and Child Studies, Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

M. Rezaul Islam

Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Niaz Ahmed Khan

Department of Social Work, School of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Rajendra Baikady

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Abusaleh, K., Anwar, A.B. (2022). Research: Meaning and Purpose. In: Islam, M.R., Khan, N.A., Baikady, R. (eds) Principles of Social Research Methodology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5441-2_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5441-2_2

Published : 27 October 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-19-5219-7

Online ISBN : 978-981-19-5441-2

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Privacy Policy

Home » Scientific Research – Types, Purpose and Guide

Scientific Research – Types, Purpose and Guide

Table of Contents

Scientific Research

Definition:

Scientific research is the systematic and empirical investigation of phenomena, theories, or hypotheses, using various methods and techniques in order to acquire new knowledge or to validate existing knowledge.

It involves the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of data, as well as the formulation and testing of hypotheses. Scientific research can be conducted in various fields, such as natural sciences, social sciences, and engineering, and may involve experiments, observations, surveys, or other forms of data collection. The goal of scientific research is to advance knowledge, improve understanding, and contribute to the development of solutions to practical problems.

Types of Scientific Research

There are different types of scientific research, which can be classified based on their purpose, method, and application. In this response, we will discuss the four main types of scientific research.

Descriptive Research

Descriptive research aims to describe or document a particular phenomenon or situation, without altering it in any way. This type of research is usually done through observation, surveys, or case studies. Descriptive research is useful in generating ideas, understanding complex phenomena, and providing a foundation for future research. However, it does not provide explanations or causal relationships between variables.

Exploratory Research

Exploratory research aims to explore a new area of inquiry or develop initial ideas for future research. This type of research is usually conducted through observation, interviews, or focus groups. Exploratory research is useful in generating hypotheses, identifying research questions, and determining the feasibility of a larger study. However, it does not provide conclusive evidence or establish cause-and-effect relationships.

Experimental Research

Experimental research aims to test cause-and-effect relationships between variables by manipulating one variable and observing the effects on another variable. This type of research involves the use of an experimental group, which receives a treatment, and a control group, which does not receive the treatment. Experimental research is useful in establishing causal relationships, replicating results, and controlling extraneous variables. However, it may not be feasible or ethical to manipulate certain variables in some contexts.

Correlational Research

Correlational research aims to examine the relationship between two or more variables without manipulating them. This type of research involves the use of statistical techniques to determine the strength and direction of the relationship between variables. Correlational research is useful in identifying patterns, predicting outcomes, and testing theories. However, it does not establish causation or control for confounding variables.

Scientific Research Methods

Scientific research methods are used in scientific research to investigate phenomena, acquire knowledge, and answer questions using empirical evidence. Here are some commonly used scientific research methods:

Observational Studies

This method involves observing and recording phenomena as they occur in their natural setting. It can be done through direct observation or by using tools such as cameras, microscopes, or sensors.

Experimental Studies

This method involves manipulating one or more variables to determine the effect on the outcome. This type of study is often used to establish cause-and-effect relationships.

Survey Research

This method involves collecting data from a large number of people by asking them a set of standardized questions. Surveys can be conducted in person, over the phone, or online.

Case Studies

This method involves in-depth analysis of a single individual, group, or organization. Case studies are often used to gain insights into complex or unusual phenomena.

Meta-analysis

This method involves combining data from multiple studies to arrive at a more reliable conclusion. This technique can be used to identify patterns and trends across a large number of studies.

Qualitative Research

This method involves collecting and analyzing non-numerical data, such as interviews, focus groups, or observations. This type of research is often used to explore complex phenomena and to gain an understanding of people’s experiences and perspectives.

Quantitative Research

This method involves collecting and analyzing numerical data using statistical techniques. This type of research is often used to test hypotheses and to establish cause-and-effect relationships.

Longitudinal Studies

This method involves following a group of individuals over a period of time to observe changes and to identify patterns and trends. This type of study can be used to investigate the long-term effects of a particular intervention or exposure.

Data Analysis Methods

There are many different data analysis methods used in scientific research, and the choice of method depends on the type of data being collected and the research question. Here are some commonly used data analysis methods:

• Descriptive statistics: This involves using summary statistics such as mean, median, mode, standard deviation, and range to describe the basic features of the data.
• Inferential statistics: This involves using statistical tests to make inferences about a population based on a sample of data. Examples of inferential statistics include t-tests, ANOVA, and regression analysis.
• Qualitative analysis: This involves analyzing non-numerical data such as interviews, focus groups, and observations. Qualitative analysis may involve identifying themes, patterns, or categories in the data.
• Content analysis: This involves analyzing the content of written or visual materials such as articles, speeches, or images. Content analysis may involve identifying themes, patterns, or categories in the content.
• Data mining: This involves using automated methods to analyze large datasets to identify patterns, trends, or relationships in the data.
• Machine learning: This involves using algorithms to analyze data and make predictions or classifications based on the patterns identified in the data.

Application of Scientific Research

Scientific research has numerous applications in many fields, including:

• Medicine and healthcare: Scientific research is used to develop new drugs, medical treatments, and vaccines. It is also used to understand the causes and risk factors of diseases, as well as to develop new diagnostic tools and medical devices.
• Agriculture : Scientific research is used to develop new crop varieties, to improve crop yields, and to develop more sustainable farming practices.
• Technology and engineering : Scientific research is used to develop new technologies and engineering solutions, such as renewable energy systems, new materials, and advanced manufacturing techniques.
• Environmental science : Scientific research is used to understand the impacts of human activity on the environment and to develop solutions for mitigating those impacts. It is also used to monitor and manage natural resources, such as water and air quality.
• Education : Scientific research is used to develop new teaching methods and educational materials, as well as to understand how people learn and develop.
• Business and economics: Scientific research is used to understand consumer behavior, to develop new products and services, and to analyze economic trends and policies.
• Social sciences : Scientific research is used to understand human behavior, attitudes, and social dynamics. It is also used to develop interventions to improve social welfare and to inform public policy.

How to Conduct Scientific Research

Conducting scientific research involves several steps, including:

• Identify a research question: Start by identifying a question or problem that you want to investigate. This question should be clear, specific, and relevant to your field of study.
• Conduct a literature review: Before starting your research, conduct a thorough review of existing research in your field. This will help you identify gaps in knowledge and develop hypotheses or research questions.
• Develop a research plan: Once you have a research question, develop a plan for how you will collect and analyze data to answer that question. This plan should include a detailed methodology, a timeline, and a budget.
• Collect data: Depending on your research question and methodology, you may collect data through surveys, experiments, observations, or other methods.
• Analyze data: Once you have collected your data, analyze it using appropriate statistical or qualitative methods. This will help you draw conclusions about your research question.
• Interpret results: Based on your analysis, interpret your results and draw conclusions about your research question. Discuss any limitations or implications of your findings.
• Communicate results: Finally, communicate your findings to others in your field through presentations, publications, or other means.

Purpose of Scientific Research

The purpose of scientific research is to systematically investigate phenomena, acquire new knowledge, and advance our understanding of the world around us. Scientific research has several key goals, including:

• Exploring the unknown: Scientific research is often driven by curiosity and the desire to explore uncharted territory. Scientists investigate phenomena that are not well understood, in order to discover new insights and develop new theories.
• Testing hypotheses: Scientific research involves developing hypotheses or research questions, and then testing them through observation and experimentation. This allows scientists to evaluate the validity of their ideas and refine their understanding of the phenomena they are studying.
• Solving problems: Scientific research is often motivated by the desire to solve practical problems or address real-world challenges. For example, researchers may investigate the causes of a disease in order to develop new treatments, or explore ways to make renewable energy more affordable and accessible.
• Advancing knowledge: Scientific research is a collective effort to advance our understanding of the world around us. By building on existing knowledge and developing new insights, scientists contribute to a growing body of knowledge that can be used to inform decision-making, solve problems, and improve our lives.

Examples of Scientific Research

Here are some examples of scientific research that are currently ongoing or have recently been completed:

• Clinical trials for new treatments: Scientific research in the medical field often involves clinical trials to test new treatments for diseases and conditions. For example, clinical trials may be conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of new drugs or medical devices.
• Genomics research: Scientists are conducting research to better understand the human genome and its role in health and disease. This includes research on genetic mutations that can cause diseases such as cancer, as well as the development of personalized medicine based on an individual’s genetic makeup.
• Climate change: Scientific research is being conducted to understand the causes and impacts of climate change, as well as to develop solutions for mitigating its effects. This includes research on renewable energy technologies, carbon capture and storage, and sustainable land use practices.
• Neuroscience : Scientists are conducting research to understand the workings of the brain and the nervous system, with the goal of developing new treatments for neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease.
• Artificial intelligence: Researchers are working to develop new algorithms and technologies to improve the capabilities of artificial intelligence systems. This includes research on machine learning, computer vision, and natural language processing.
• Space exploration: Scientific research is being conducted to explore the cosmos and learn more about the origins of the universe. This includes research on exoplanets, black holes, and the search for extraterrestrial life.

When to use Scientific Research

Some specific situations where scientific research may be particularly useful include:

• Solving problems: Scientific research can be used to investigate practical problems or address real-world challenges. For example, scientists may investigate the causes of a disease in order to develop new treatments, or explore ways to make renewable energy more affordable and accessible.
• Decision-making: Scientific research can provide evidence-based information to inform decision-making. For example, policymakers may use scientific research to evaluate the effectiveness of different policy options or to make decisions about public health and safety.
• Innovation : Scientific research can be used to develop new technologies, products, and processes. For example, research on materials science can lead to the development of new materials with unique properties that can be used in a range of applications.
• Knowledge creation : Scientific research is an important way of generating new knowledge and advancing our understanding of the world around us. This can lead to new theories, insights, and discoveries that can benefit society.

Advantages of Scientific Research

There are many advantages of scientific research, including:

• Improved understanding : Scientific research allows us to gain a deeper understanding of the world around us, from the smallest subatomic particles to the largest celestial bodies.
• Evidence-based decision making: Scientific research provides evidence-based information that can inform decision-making in many fields, from public policy to medicine.
• Technological advancements: Scientific research drives technological advancements in fields such as medicine, engineering, and materials science. These advancements can improve quality of life, increase efficiency, and reduce costs.
• New discoveries: Scientific research can lead to new discoveries and breakthroughs that can advance our knowledge in many fields. These discoveries can lead to new theories, technologies, and products.
• Economic benefits : Scientific research can stimulate economic growth by creating new industries and jobs, and by generating new technologies and products.
• Improved health outcomes: Scientific research can lead to the development of new medical treatments and technologies that can improve health outcomes and quality of life for people around the world.
• Increased innovation: Scientific research encourages innovation by promoting collaboration, creativity, and curiosity. This can lead to new and unexpected discoveries that can benefit society.

Limitations of Scientific Research

Scientific research has some limitations that researchers should be aware of. These limitations can include:

• Research design limitations : The design of a research study can impact the reliability and validity of the results. Poorly designed studies can lead to inaccurate or inconclusive results. Researchers must carefully consider the study design to ensure that it is appropriate for the research question and the population being studied.
• Sample size limitations: The size of the sample being studied can impact the generalizability of the results. Small sample sizes may not be representative of the larger population, and may lead to incorrect conclusions.
• Time and resource limitations: Scientific research can be costly and time-consuming. Researchers may not have the resources necessary to conduct a large-scale study, or may not have sufficient time to complete a study with appropriate controls and analysis.
• Ethical limitations : Certain types of research may raise ethical concerns, such as studies involving human or animal subjects. Ethical concerns may limit the scope of the research that can be conducted, or require additional protocols and procedures to ensure the safety and well-being of participants.
• Limitations of technology: Technology may limit the types of research that can be conducted, or the accuracy of the data collected. For example, certain types of research may require advanced technology that is not yet available, or may be limited by the accuracy of current measurement tools.
• Limitations of existing knowledge: Existing knowledge may limit the types of research that can be conducted. For example, if there is limited knowledge in a particular field, it may be difficult to design a study that can provide meaningful results.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Humanities Research – Types, Methods and Examples

Original Research – Definition, Examples, Guide

Historical Research – Types, Methods and Examples

Documentary Research – Types, Methods and...

Artistic Research – Methods, Types and Examples

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

How to Conduct Responsible Research: A Guide for Graduate Students

Alison l. antes.

1 Department of Medicine, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, 314-362-6006

Leonard B. Maggi, Jr.

2 Department of Medicine, Division of Molecular Oncology, Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, 314-362-4102

Researchers must conduct research responsibly for it to have an impact and to safeguard trust in science. Essential responsibilities of researchers include using rigorous, reproducible research methods, reporting findings in a trustworthy manner, and giving the researchers who contributed appropriate authorship credit. This “how-to” guide covers strategies and practices for doing reproducible research and being a responsible author. The article also covers how to utilize decision-making strategies when uncertain about the best way to proceed in a challenging situation. The advice focuses especially on graduate students but is appropriate for undergraduates and experienced researchers. The article begins with an overview of the responsible conduct of research, research misconduct, and ethical behavior in the scientific workplace. The takeaway message is that responsible conduct of research requires a thoughtful approach to doing research to ensure trustworthy results and conclusions and that researchers receive fair credit.

INTRODUCTION

Doing research is stimulating and fulfilling work. Scientists make discoveries to build knowledge and solve problems, and they work with other dedicated researchers. Research is a highly complex activity, so it takes years for beginning researchers to learn everything they need to know to do science well. Part of this large body of knowledge is learning how to do research responsibly. Our purpose in this article is to provide graduate students a guide for how to perform responsible research. Our advice is also relevant to undergraduate researchers and for principal investigators (PIs), postdocs, or other researchers who mentor beginning researchers and wish to share our advice.

We begin by introducing some fundamentals about the responsible conduct of research (RCR), research misconduct, and ethical behavior. We focus on how to do reproducible science and be a responsible author. We provide practical advice for these topics and present scenarios to practice thinking through challenges in research. Our article concludes with decision-making strategies for addressing complex problems.

What is the responsible conduct of research?

To be committed to RCR means upholding the highest standards of honesty, accuracy, efficiency, and objectivity ( Steneck, 2007 ). Each day, RCR requires engaging in research in a conscientious, intentional fashion that yields the best science possible ( “Research Integrity is Much More Than Misconduct,” 2019 ). We adopt a practical, “how-to” approach, discussing the behaviors and habits that yield responsible research. However, some background knowledge about RCR is helpful to frame our discussion.

The scientific community uses many terms to refer to ethical and responsible behavior in research: responsible conduct of research, research integrity, scientific integrity, and research ethics ( National Academies of Science, 2009 ; National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, 2017 ; Steneck, 2007 ). A helpful way to think about these concepts is “doing good science in a good manner” ( DuBois & Antes, 2018 ). This means that the way researchers do their work, from experimental procedures to data analysis and interpretation, research reporting, and so on, leads to trustworthy research findings and conclusions. It also includes respectful interactions among researchers both within research teams (e.g., between peers, mentors and trainees, and collaborators) and with researchers external to the team (e.g., peer reviewers). We expand on trainee-mentor relationships and interpersonal dynamics with labmates in a companion article ( Antes & Maggi, 2021 ). When research involves human or animal research subjects, RCR includes protecting the well-being of research subjects.

We do not cover all potential RCR topics but focus on what we consider fundamentals for graduate students. Common topics covered in texts and courses on RCR include the following: authorship and publication; collaboration; conflicts of interest; data management, sharing, and ownership; intellectual property; mentor and trainee responsibilities; peer review; protecting human subjects; protecting animal subjects; research misconduct; the role of researchers in society; and laboratory safety. A number of topics prominently discussed among the scientific community in recent years are also relevant to RCR. These include the reproducibility of research ( Baker, 2016 ; Barba, 2016 ; Winchester, 2018 ), diversity and inclusion in science ( Asplund & Welle, 2018 ; Hofstra et al., 2020 ; Meyers, Brown, Moneta-Koehler, & Chalkley, 2018 ; National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, 2018a ; Roper, 2019 ), harassment and bullying ( Else, 2018 ; National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, 2018b ; “ No Place for Bullies in Science,” 2018 ), healthy research work environments ( Norris, Dirnagl, Zigmond, Thompson-Peer, & Chow, 2018 ; “ Research Institutions Must Put the Health of Labs First,” 2018 ), and the mental health of graduate students ( Evans, Bira, Gastelum, Weiss, & Vanderford, 2018 ).

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) ( National Institutes of Health, 2009 ) and the National Science Foundation ( National Science Foundation, 2017 ) have formal policies indicating research trainees must receive education in RCR. Researchers are accountable to these funding agencies and the public which supports research through billions in tax dollars annually. The public stands to benefit from, or be harmed by, research. For example, the public may be harmed if medical treatments or social policies are based on untrustworthy research findings. Funding for research, participation in research, and utilization of the fruits of research all rely on public trust ( Resnik, 2011 ). Trustworthy findings are also essential for good stewardship of scarce resources ( Emanuel, Wendler, & Grady, 2000 ). Researchers are further accountable to their peers, colleagues, and scientists more broadly. Trust in the work of other researchers is essential for science to advance. Finally, researchers are accountable for complying with the rules and policies of their universities or research institutions, such as rules about laboratory safety, bullying and harassment, and the treatment of animal research subjects.

What is research misconduct?

When researchers intentionally misrepresent or manipulate their results, these cases of scientific fraud often make the news headlines ( Chappell, 2019 ; O’Connor, 2018 ; Park, 2012 ), and they can seriously undermine public trust in research. These cases also harm trust within the scientific community.

The U.S. defines research misconduct as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (FFP) ( Department of Health and Human Services, 2005 ). FFP violate the fundamental ethical principle of honesty. Fabrication is making up data, and falsification is manipulating or changing data or results so they are no longer truthful. Plagiarism is a form of dishonesty because it includes using someone’s words or ideas and portraying them as your own. When brought to light, misconduct involves lengthy investigations and serious consequences, such as ineligibility to receive federal research funding, loss of employment, paper retractions, and, for students, withdrawal of graduate degrees.

One aspect of responsible behavior includes addressing misconduct if you observe it. We suggest a guide titled “Responding to Research Wrongdoing: A User-Friendly Guide” that provides advice for thinking about your options if you think you have observed misconduct ( Keith-Spiegel, Sieber, & Koocher, 2010 ). Your university will have written policies and procedures for investigating allegations of misconduct. Making an allegation is very serious. As Keith-Spiegel et al.’s guide indicates, it is important to know the evidence that supports your claim, and what to expect in the process. We encourage, if possible, talking to the persons involved first. For example, one of us knew of a graduate student who reported to a journal editor their suspicion of falsified data in a manuscript. It turned out that the student was incorrect. Going above the PI directly to the editor ultimately led to the PI leaving the university, and the student had a difficult time finding a new lab to complete their degree. If the student had first spoken to the PI and lab members, they could have learned that their assumptions about the data in the paper were wrong. In turn, they could have avoided accusing the PI of a serious form of scientific misconduct—making up data—and harming everyone’s scientific career.

What shapes ethical behavior in the scientific workplace?

Responsible conduct of research and research misconduct are two sides of a continuum of behavior—RCR upholds the ideals of research and research misconduct violates them. Problematic practices that fall in the middle but are not defined formally as research misconduct have been labeled as detrimental research practices ( National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, 2017 ). Researchers conducting misleading statistical analyses or PIs providing inadequate supervision are examples of the latter. Research suggests that characteristics of individual researchers and research environments explain (un)ethical behavior in the scientific workplace ( Antes et al., 2007 ; Antes, English, Baldwin, & DuBois, 2018 ; Davis, Riske-Morris, & Diaz, 2007 ; DuBois et al., 2013 ).

These two influences on ethical behavior are helpful to keep in mind when thinking about your behavior. When people think about their ethical behavior, they think about their personal values and integrity and tend to overlook the influence of their environment. While “being a good person” and having the right intentions are essential to ethical behavior, the environment also has an influence. In addition, knowledge of standards for ethical research is important for ethical behavior, and graduate students new to research do not yet know everything they need to. They also have not fully refined their ethical decision-making skills for solving professional problems. We discuss strategies for ethical decision-making in the final section of this article ( McIntosh, Antes, & DuBois, 2020 ).

The research environment influences ethical behavior in a number of ways. For example, if a research group explicitly discusses high standards for research, people will be more likely to prioritize these ideals in their behavior ( Plemmons et al., 2020 ). A mentor who sets a good example is another important factor ( Anderson et al., 2007 ). Research labs must also provide individuals with adequate training, supervision and feedback, opportunities to discuss data, and the psychological safety to feel comfortable communicating about problems, including mistakes ( Antes, Kuykendall, & DuBois, 2019a , 2019b ). On the other hand, unfair research environments, inadequate supervision, poor communication, and severe stress and anxiety may undermine ethical decision-making and behavior; particularly when many of these factors exist together. Thus, (un)ethical behavior is a complex interplay of individual factors (e.g., personality, stress, decision-making skills) and the environment.

For graduate students, it is important to attend to what you are learning and how the environment around you might influence your behavior. You do not know what you do not know, and you necessarily rely on others to teach you responsible practices. So, it is important to be aware. Ultimately, you are accountable for your behavior. You cannot just say “I didn’t know.” Rather, just like you are curious about your scientific questions, maintain a curiosity about responsible behavior as a researcher. If you feel uncomfortable with something, pay attention to that feeling, speak to someone you trust, and seek out information about how to handle the situation. In what follows, we cover key tips for responsible behavior in the areas of reproducibility and authorship that we hope will help you as you begin.

HOW TO DO REPRODUCIBLE SCIENCE

The foremost responsibility of scientists is to ensure they conduct research in such a manner that the findings are trustworthy. Reproducibility is the ability to duplicate results ( Goodman, Fanelli, & Ioannidis, 2016 ). The scientific community has called for greater openness, transparency, and rigor as key remedies for lack of reproducibility ( Munafò et al., 2017 ). As a graduate student, essential to fostering reproducibility is the rigor of your approach to doing experiments and handling data. We discuss how to utilize research protocols, document experiments in a lab notebook, and handle data responsibly.

Utilize research protocols

1. learn and utilize the lab’s protocols.

Research protocols describe the step-by-step procedures for doing an experiment. They are critical for the quality and reproducibility of experiments. Lab members must learn and follow the lab’s protocols with the understanding that they may need to make adjustments based on the requirements of a specific experiment.

Also, it is important to distinguish between the experiment you are performing and analyzing the data from that experiment. For example, the experiment you want to perform might be to determine if loss of a gene blocks cell growth. Several protocols, each with pros and cons, will allow you to examine “cell growth.” Using the wrong experimental protocol can produce data that leads to muddled conclusions. In this example, the gene does block cell growth, but the experiment used to produce the data that you analyze to understand cell growth is wrong, thus giving a result that is a false negative.

When first joining a lab, it is essential to commit to learning the protocols necessary for your assigned research project. Researchers must ensure they are proficient in executing a protocol and can perform their experiments reliably. If you do not feel confident with a protocol, you should do practice runs if possible. Repetition is the best way to work through difficulties with protocols. Often it takes several attempts to work through the steps of a protocol before you will be comfortable performing it. Asking to watch another lab member perform the protocol is also helpful. Be sure to watch closely how steps are performed, as often there are minor steps taken that are not written down. Also, experienced lab members may do things as second nature and not think to explicitly mention them when working through the protocol. Ask questions of other lab members so that you can improve your knowledge and gain confidence with a protocol. It is better to ask a question than potentially ruin a valuable or hard-to-get sample.

Be cautious of differences in the standing protocols in the lab and how you actually perform the experiment. Even the most minor deviations can seriously impact the results and reproducibility of an experiment. As mentioned above, often there are minor things that are done that might not be listed in the protocol. Paying attention and asking questions are the best ways to learn, in addition to adding notes to the protocol if you find minor details are missing.

2. Develop your own protocols

Often you will find that a project requires a protocol that has not been performed in the lab. If performing a new experiment in the lab and no protocol exists, find a protocol and try it. Protocols can be obtained from many different sources. A great source is other labs on campus, as you can speak directly to the person who performs the experiment. There are many journal sources as well, such as Current Protocols, Nature Protocols, Nature Methods, and Cell STAR Methods . These methods journals provide the most detailed protocols for experiments often with troubleshooting tips. Scientific papers are the most common source of protocols. However, keep in mind that due to the common brevity of methods sections, they often omit crucial details or reference other papers that may not contain a complete description of the protocol.

3. Handle mistakes or problems promptly

At some point, everyone encounters problems with a protocol, or realizes they made a mistake. You should be prepared to handle this situation by being able to detail exactly how you performed the experiment. Did you skip a step? Shorten or lengthen a time point? Did you have to make a new buffer or borrow a labmate’s buffer? There are too many ways an experiment can go wrong to list here but being able to recount all the steps you performed in detail will help you work through the problem. Keep in mind that often the best way to understand how to perform an experiment is learning from when something goes wrong. This situation requires you to critically think through what was done and understand the steps taken. When everything works perfectly, it is easy to pay less attention to the details, which can lead to problems down the line.

It is up to you to be attentive and meticulous in the lab. Paying attention to the details may feel like a pain at first, or even seem overwhelming. Practice and repetition will help this focus on details become a natural part of your lab work. Ultimately, this skill will be essential to being a responsible scientist.

Document experiments in a lab notebook

1. recognize the importance of a lab notebook.

Maintaining detailed documentation in a lab notebook allows researchers to keep track of their experiments and generation of data. This detailed documentation helps you communicate about your research with others in the lab, and serves as a basis for preparing publications. It also provides a lasting record for the lab that exists beyond your time in the lab. After graduate students leave the lab, sometimes it is necessary to go back to the results of older experiments. A complete and detailed notebook is essential, or all of the time, effort, and resources are lost.

2. Learn the note-keeping practices in your lab

When you enter a new lab, it is important to understand how the lab keeps notebooks and the expectations for documentation. Being conscientious about documentation will make you a better scientist. In some labs, the PI might routinely examine your notebook, while in other labs you may be expected to maintain a notebook, but it may not be regularly viewed by others. It is tempting to become relaxed in documentation if you think your notebook may not be reviewed. Avoid this temptation; documentation of your ideas and process will improve your ability to think critically about research. Further, even if the PI or lab members do not physically view your notebook, you will need to communicate with them about your experiments. This documentation is necessary to communicate effectively about your work.

3. Organize your lab notebook

Different labs use different formats; some use electronic notebooks while others handwritten notebooks. The contents of a good notebook include the purpose of the experiment, the details of the experimental procedure, the data, and thoughts about the results. To effectively document your experiment, there are 5 critical questions that the information you record should be able to answer.

• Why I am doing this experiment? (purpose)
• What did I do to perform the experiment? (protocol)
• What are the results of what I did? (data, graphs)
• What do I think about the results?
• What do I think are the next steps?

We also recommend a table of contents. It will make the information more useful to you and the lab in the future. The table of contents should list the title of the experiment, the date(s) it was performed, and the page numbers on which it is recorded. Also, make sure that you write clearly and provide a legend or explanation of any shorthand or non-standard abbreviation you use. Often labs will have a combination of written lab notebooks and electronic data. It is important to reference where electronic data are located that go with each experiment. The idea is to make it as easy as possible to understand what you did and where to find all the data (electronic and hard copy) that accompanies your experiment.

Keeping a lab notebook becomes easier with practice. It can be thought of almost like journaling about your experiment. Sometimes people think of it as just a place to paste their protocol and a graph or data. We strongly encourage you to include your thoughts about why you made the decisions you made when conducting the experiment and to document your thoughts about next steps.

4. Commit to doing it the right way

A common reason to become lax in documentation is feeling rushed for time. Although documentation takes time, it saves time in the long-run and fosters good science. Without good notes, you will waste time trying to recall precisely what you did, reproduce your findings, and remember what you thought would be important next steps. The lab notebook helps you think about your research critically and keep your thoughts together. It can also save you time later when writing up results for publication. Further, well-documented data will help you draft a cogent and rigorous dissertation.

Handle data responsibly

1. keep all data.

Data are the product of research. Data include raw data, processed data, analyzed data, figures, and tables. Many data today are electronic, but not all. Generating data requires a lot of time and resources and researchers must treat data with care. The first essential tip is to keep all data. Do not discard data just because the experiment did not turn out as expected. A lot of experiments do not turn out to yield publishable data, but the results are still important for informing next steps.

Always keep the original, raw data. That is, as you process and analyze data, always maintain an unprocessed version of the original data.

Universities and funding agencies have data retention policies. These policies specify the number of years beyond a grant that data must be kept. Some policies also indicate researchers need to retain original data that served as the basis for a publication for a certain number of years. Therefore, your data will be important well beyond your time in graduate school. Most labs require you to keep samples for reanalysis until a paper is published, then the analyzed data are enough. If you leave a lab before a paper is accepted for publication, you are responsible for ensuring your data and original samples are well documented for others to find and use.

2. Document all data

In addition to keeping all data, data must be well-organized and documented. This means that no matter the way you keep your data (e.g., electronic or in written lab notebooks), there is a clear guide—in your lab notebook, a binder, or on a lab hard drive—to finding the data for a particular experiment. For example, it must be clear which data produced a particular graph. Version control of data is also critical. Your documentation should include “metadata” (data about your data) that tracks versions of the data. For example, as you edit data for a table, you should save separate versions of the tables, name the files sequentially, and note the changes that were made to each version.

3. Backup your data

You should backup electronic data regularly. Ideally, your lab has a shared server or cloud storage to backup data. If you are supposed to put your data there, make sure you do it! When you leave the lab, it must be possible to find your data.

4. Perform data analysis honestly and competently

Inappropriate use of statistics is a major concern in the scientific community, as the results and conclusions will be misleading if done incorrectly ( DeMets, 1999 ). Some practices are clearly an abuse of statistics, while other inappropriate practices stem from lack of knowledge. For example, a practice called “p-hacking” describes when researchers “collect or select data or statistical analyses until nonsignificant results become significant” ( Head, Holman, Lanfear, Kahn, & Jennions, 2015 ). In addition to avoiding such misbehavior, it is essential to be proficient with statistics to ensure you do statistical procedures appropriately. Learning statistical procedures and analyzing data takes many years of practice, and your statistics courses may only cover the basics. You will need to know when to consult others for help. In addition to consulting members in your lab or your PI, your university may have statistical experts who can provide consultations.

5. Master pressure to obtain favored results

When you conduct an experiment, the results are the results. As a beginning researcher, it is important to be prepared to manage the frustration of experiments not turning out as expected. It is also important to manage the real or perceived pressure to produce favored results. Investigators can become wedded to a hypothesis, and they can have a difficult time accepting the results. Sometimes you may feel this pressure coming from yourself; for example, if you want to please your PI, or if you want to get results for a certain publication. It is important to always follow the data no matter where it leads.

If you do feel pressure, this situation can be uncomfortable and stressful. If you have been meticulous and followed the above recommendations, this can be one great safeguard. You will be better able to confidently communicate your results to the PI because of your detailed documentation, and you will be more confident in your procedures if the possibility of error is suggested. Typically, with enough evidence that the unexpected results are real, the PI will concede. We recommend seeking the support of friends or colleagues to vent and cope with stress. In the rare case that the PI does not relent, you could turn to an advisor outside the lab if you need advice about how to proceed. They can help you look at the data objectively and also help you think about the interpersonal aspects of navigating this situation.

6. Communicate about your data in the lab

A critical element of reproducible research is communication in the lab. Ideally, there are weekly or bi-weekly meetings to discuss data. You need to develop your communication skills for writing and speaking about data. Often you and your labmates will discuss experimental issues and results informally during the course of daily work. This is an excellent way to hone critical thinking and communication skills about data.

Scenario 1 – The Protocol is Not Working

At the beginning of a rotation during their first year, a graduate student is handed a lab notebook and a pen and is told to keep track of their work. There does not appear to be a specific format to follow. There are standard lab protocols that everyone follows, but minor tweaks to the protocols do not seem to be tracked from experiment to experiment in the standard lab protocol nor in other lab notebooks. After two weeks of trying to follow one of the standard lab protocols, the student still cannot get the experiment to work. The student has included the appropriate positive and negative controls which are failing, making the experiment uninterpretable. After asking others in the lab for help, the graduate student learns that no one currently in the lab has performed this particular experiment. The former lab member who had performed the experiment only lists the standard protocol in their lab notebook.

How should the graduate student start to solve the problem?

Speaking to the PI would be the next logical step. As a first-year student in a lab rotation, the PI should expect this type of situation and provide additional troubleshooting guidance. It is possible that the PI may want to see how the new graduate student thinks critically and handles adversity in the lab. Rather than giving an answer, the PI might ask the student to work through the problem. The PI should give guidance, but it may not be an immediate fix for the problem. If the PI’s suggestions fail to correct the problem, asking a labmate or the PI for the contact information of the former lab member who most recently performed the experiment would be a reasonable next step. The graduate student’s conversations with the PI and labmates in this situation will help them learn a lot about how the people in the lab interact.

Most of the answers for these types of problems will require you as a graduate student to take the initiative to answer. They will require your effort and ingenuity to talk to other lab members, other labs at the university, and even scour the literature for alternatives. While labs have standard protocols, there are multiple ways to do many experiments, and working out an alternative will teach you more than when everything works. Having to troubleshoot problems will result in better standard protocols in the lab and better science.

HOW TO BE A RESPONSIBLE AUTHOR

Researchers communicate their findings via peer-reviewed publications, and publications are important for advancing in a research career. Many graduate students will first author or co-author publications in graduate school. For good advice on how to write a research manuscript, consult the Current Protocols article “How to write a research manuscript” ( Frank, 2018 ). We focus on the issues of assigning authors and reporting your findings responsibly. First, we describe some important basics: journal impact factors, predatory journals, and peer review.

What are journal impact factors?

It is helpful to understand journal impact factors. There is criticism about an overemphasis on impact factors for evaluating the quality or importance of researchers’ work ( DePellegrin & Johnston, 2015 ), but they remain common for this purpose. Journal impact factors reflect the average number of times articles in a journal were cited in the last two years. Higher impact factors place journals at a higher rank. Approximately 2% of journals have an impact factor of 10 or higher. For example, Cell, Science, and Nature have impact factors of approximately 39, 42, and 43, respectively. Journals can be great journals but have lower impact factors; often this is because they focus on a smaller specialty field. For example, Journal of Immunology and Oncogene are respected journals, but their impact factors are about 4 and 7, respectively.

Research trainees often want to publish in journals with the highest possible impact factor because they expect this to be viewed favorably when applying to future positions. We encourage you to bear in mind that many different journals publish excellent science and focus on publishing where your work will reach the desired audience. Also, keep in mind that while a high impact factor can direct you to respectable, high-impact science, it does not guarantee that the science in the paper is good or even correct. You must critically evaluate all papers you read no matter the impact factor.

What are predatory journals?

Predatory journals have flourished over the past few years as publishing science has moved online. An international panel defined predatory journals as follows ( Grudniewicz et al., 2019 ):

Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices. (p. 211)

Often young researchers receive emails soliciting them to submit their work to a journal. There are typically small fees (around $99 US) requested but these fees will be much lower than open access fees of reputable journals (often around $2000 US). A warning sign of a predatory journal is outlandish promises, such as 24-hour peer review or immediate publication. You can find a list of predatory journals created by a postdoc in Europe at BeallsList.net ( “Beall’s List of Potential Predatory Journals and Publishers,” 2020 ).

What is peer review?

Peer reviewers are other scientists who have the expertise to evaluate a manuscript. Typically 2 or 3 reviewers evaluate a manuscript. First, an editor performs an initial screen of the manuscript to ensure its appropriateness for the journal and that it meets basic quality standards. At this stage, an editor can decide to reject the manuscript and not send it to review. Not sending a paper for peer review is common in the highest impact journals that receive more submissions per year than can be reviewed and published. For average-impact journals and specialty journals, typically your paper will be sent for peer review.

In general, peer review focuses on three aspects of a manuscript: research design and methods, validity of the data and conclusions, and significance. Peer reviewers assess the merit and rigor of the research design and methodology, and they evaluate the overall validity of the results, interpretations, and conclusions. Essentially, reviewers want to ensure that the data support the claims. Additionally, reviewers evaluate the overall significance, or contribution, of the findings, which involves the novelty of the research and the likelihood that the findings will advance the field. Significance standards vary between journals. Some journals are open to publishing findings that are incremental advancements in a field, while others want to publish only what they deem as major advancements. This feature can distinguish the highest impact journals which seek the most significant advancements and other journals that tend to consider a broader range of work as long as it is scientifically sound. It is important to keep in mind that determining at the stage of review and publication whether a paper is “high impact” is quite subjective. In reality, this can only really be determined in retrospect.

The key ethical issues in peer review are fairness, objectivity, and confidentiality ( Shamoo & Resnik, 2015 ). Peer reviewers are to evaluate the manuscript on its merits and not based on biases related to the authors or the science itself. If reviewers have a conflict of interest, this should be disclosed to the editor. Confidentiality of peer review means that the reviewers should keep private the information; they should not share the information with others or use it to their benefit. Reviewers can ultimately recommend that the manuscript is rejected, revised, and resubmitted (major or minor revisions), or accepted. The editor evaluates the reviewers’ feedback and makes a judgment about rejecting, accepting, or requesting a revision. Sometimes PIs will ask experienced graduate students to assist with peer reviewing a manuscript. This is a good learning opportunity. The PI should disclose to the editor that they included a trainee in preparing the review.

Assign authorship fairly

Authorship gives credit to the people who contributed to the research. This includes thinking of the ideas, designing and performing experiments, interpreting the results, and writing the paper. Two key questions regarding authorship include: 1 - Who will be an author? 2 - What will be the order in which authors are listed? These seem simple on the surface but can get quite complex.

1. Know authorship guidelines

Authorship guidelines published by journals, professional societies, and universities communicate key principles of authorship and standards for earning authorship. The core ethical principle of assigning authorship is fairness in who receives credit for the work. The people who contributed to the work should get credit for it. This seems simply enough, but determining authorship can (and often does) create conflict.

Many universities have authorship guidelines, and you should know the policies at your university. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) provides four criteria for determining who should be an author ( International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, 2020 ). These criteria indicate that an author should do all of the following: 1) make “substantial contributions” to the development of the idea or research design, or to acquiring, analyzing, or interpreting the data, 2) write the manuscript or revise it a substantive way, 3) give approval of the final manuscript (i.e., before it is submitted for review, and after it is revised, if necessary), and 4) agree to be responsible for any questions about the accuracy or integrity of the research.

Several types of authorship violate these guidelines and should be avoided. Guest authorship is when respected researchers are added out of appreciation, or to have the manuscript be perceived more favorably to get it published or increase its impact. Gift authorship is giving authorship to reward an individual, or as a favor. Ghost authorship is when someone made significant contributions to the paper but is not listed as an author. To increase transparency, some journals require authors to indicate how each individual contributed to the research and manuscript.

2. Apply the guidelines

Conflicts often arise from disagreements about how much people contributed to the research and whether those contributions merit authorship. The best approach is an open, honest, and ongoing discussion about authorship, which we discuss in #3 below. To have effective, informed conversations about authorship, you must understand how to apply the guidelines to your specific situation. The following is a simple rule of thumb that indicates there are three components of authorship. We do not list giving final approval of the manuscript and agreeing to be accountable, but we do consider these essentials of authorship.

• Thinking – this means contributing to the ideas leading to the hypothesis of the work, designing experiments to address the hypothesis, and/or analyzing the results in the larger context of the literature in the field.
• Doing – this means performing and analyzing the experiments.
• Writing – this means editing a draft, or writing the entire paper. The first author often writes the entire first draft.

In our experience, a first author would typically do all three. They also usually coordinate the writing and editing process. Co-authors are typically very involved in at least two of the three, and are somewhat involved in the other. The PI, who oversees and contributes to all three, is often the last, or “senior author.” The “senior author” is typically the “corresponding author”—the person listed as the individual to contact about the paper. The other co-authors are listed between the first and senior author either alphabetically, or more commonly, in order from the largest to smallest contribution.

Problems in assigning authorship typically arise due to people’s interpretations of #1 (thinking) and #2 (doing)—what and how much each individual contributed to a project’s design, execution, and analysis. Different fields or PIs may have their own slight variations on these guidelines. The potential conflicts associated with assigning authorship lead to the most common recommendation for responsibly assigning authorship: discuss authorship expectations early and revisit them during the project.

3. Discuss authorship with your collaborators

Publications are important for career advancement, so you can see why people might be worried about fairness in assigning authorship. If the problem arises from a lack of a shared understanding about contributions to the research, the only way to clarify this is an open discussion. This discussion should ideally take place very early at the beginning of a project, and should be ongoing. Hopefully you work in a laboratory that makes these discussions a natural part of the research process; this makes it much easier to understand the expectations upfront.

We encourage you to speak up about your interest in making a contribution that would merit authorship, especially if you want to earn first authorship. Sometimes norms about authoring papers in a lab make it clear you are expected to first and co-author publications, but it is best to communicate your interest in earning authorship. If the project is not yours, but you wish to collaborate, you can inquire what you may be able to contribute that would merit authorship.

If it is not a norm in your lab to discuss authorship throughout the life of projects, then as a graduate student you may feel reluctant to speak up. You could initiate a conversation with a more senior graduate student, a postdoc, or your PI, depending on the dynamics in the group. You could ask generally about how the lab approaches assignment of authorship, but discussing a specific project and paper may be best. It may feel awkward to ask, but asking early is less uncomfortable than waiting until the end of the project. If the group is already drafting a manuscript and you are told that your contribution is insufficient for authorship, this situation is much more discouraging than if you had asked earlier about what is expected to earn authorship.

How to report findings responsibly

The most significant responsibility of authors is to present their research accurately and honestly. Deliberately presenting misleading information is clearly unethical, but there are significant judgment calls about how to present your research findings. For example, an author can mislead by overstating the conclusions given what the data support.

1. Commit to presenting your findings honestly

Any good scientific manuscript writer will tell you that you need to “tell a good story.” This means that your paper is organized and framed to draw the reader into the research and convince them of the importance of the findings. But, this story must be sound and justified by the data. Other authors are presenting their findings in the best, most “publishable” light, so it is a balancing act to be persuasive but also responsible in presenting your findings in a trustworthy manner. To present your findings honestly, you must be conscious of how you interpret your data and present your conclusions so that they are accurate and not overstated.

One misbehavior known as “HARKing,” Hypothesis After the Results are Known, occurs when hypotheses are created after seeing the results of an experiment, but they are presented as if they were defined prior to collecting the data ( Munafò et al., 2017 ). This practice should be avoided. HARKing may be driven, in part, by a concern in scientific publishing known as publication bias. This bias is a preference that reviewers, editors, and researchers have for papers describing positive findings instead of negative findings ( Carroll, Toumpakari, Johnson, & Betts, 2017 ). This preference can lead to manipulating one’s practices, such as by HARKing, so that positive findings can be reported.

It is important to note that in addition to avoiding misbehaviors such as HARKing, all researchers are susceptible to a number of more subtle traps in judgment. Even the most well-intentioned researcher may jump to conclusions, discount alternative explanations, or accept results that seem correct without further scrutiny ( Nuzzo, 2015 ). Therefore, researchers must not only commit to presenting their findings honestly but consider how they can counteract such traps by slowing down and increasing their skepticism towards their findings.

2. Provide an appropriate amount of detail

Providing enough detail in a manuscript can be a challenge with the word limits imposed by most journals. Therefore, you will need to determine what details to include and which to exclude, or potentially include in the supplemental materials. Methods sections can be long and are often the first to be shortened, but complete methods are important for others to evaluate the research and to repeat the methods in other studies. Even more significant is making decisions about what experimental data to include and potentially exclude from the manuscript. Researchers must determine what data is required to create a complete scientific story that supports the central hypothesis of the paper. On the other hand, it is not necessary or helpful to include so much data in the manuscript, or in supplemental material, that the central point of the paper is difficult to discern. It is a tricky balance.

3. Follow proper citation practices

Of course, responsible authorship requires avoiding plagiarism. Many researchers think that plagiarism is not a concern for them because they assume it is always done intentionally by “copying and pasting” someone else’s words and claiming them as your own. Sometimes poor writing practices, such as taking notes from references without distinguishing between direct quotes and paraphrased material, can lead to including material that is not quoted properly. More broadly, proper citation practices include accurately and completely referencing prior studies to provide appropriate context for your manuscript.

4. Attend to the other important details

The journal will require several pieces of additional information, such as disclosure of sources of funding and potential conflicts of interest. Typically, graduate students do not have relationships that constitute conflicts of interest, but a PI who is a co-author may. In submitting a manuscript, also make sure to acknowledge individuals not listed as authors but who contributed to the work.

5. Share data and promote transparency

Data sharing is a key facet of promoting transparency in science ( Nosek et al., 2015 ). It will be important to know the expectations of the journals in which you wish to publish. Many top journals now require data sharing; for example, sharing your data files in an online repository so others have access to the data for secondary use. Funding agencies like NIH also increasingly require data sharing. To further foster transparency and public trust in research, researchers must deposit their final peer-reviewed manuscripts that report on research funded by NIH to PubMed Central. PubMed makes biomedical and life science research publicly accessible in a free, online database.

Scenario 2 – Authors In Conflict

To prepare a manuscript for publication, a postdoc’s data is added to a graduate student’s thesis project. After working together to combine the data and write the paper, the postdoc requests co-first authorship on the paper. The graduate student balks at this request on the basis that it is their thesis project. In a weekly meeting with the lab’s PI to discuss the status of the paper, the graduate student states that they should divide the data between the authors as a way to prove that the graduate student should be the sole first author. The PI agrees to this attempt to quantify how much data each person contributed to the manuscript. All parties agree the writing and thinking were equally shared between them. After this assessment, the graduate student sees that the postdoc actually contributed more than half of the data presented in the paper. The graduate student and a second graduate student contributed the remaining data; this means the graduate student contributed much less than half of the data in the paper. However, the graduate student is still adamant that they must be the sole first author of the paper because it is their thesis project.

Is the graduate student correct in insisting that it is their project, so they are entitled to be the sole first author?

Co-first authorship became popular about 10 years ago as a way to acknowledge shared contributions to a paper in which authors worked together and contributed equally. If the postdoc contributed half of the data and worked with the graduate student to combine their interpretations and write the first draft of the paper, then the postdoc did make a substantial contribution. If the graduate student wrote much of the first draft of the paper, contributed significantly to the second half of data, and played a major role in the thesis concept and design, this is also a major contribution. We summarized authorship requirements as contributing to thinking, doing, and writing, and we noted that a first author usually contributes to all of these. The graduate student has met all 3 elements to claim first authorship. However, it appears that the postdoc has also met these 3 requirements. Thus, it is at least reasonable for the postdoc to ask about co-first authorship.

The best way to move forward is to discuss their perspectives openly. Both the graduate student and postdoc want first authorship on papers to advance their careers. The postdoc feels they contributed more to the overall concept and design than the graduate student is recognizing, and the postdoc did contribute half of the data. This is likely frustrating and upsetting for the postdoc. On the other hand, perhaps the postdoc is forgetting how much a thesis becomes like “your baby,” so to speak. The work is the graduate student’s thesis, so it is easy to see why the graduate student would feel a sense of ownership of it. Given this fact, it may be hard for the graduate student to accept the idea that they would share first-author recognition for the work. Yet, the graduate student should consider that the manuscript would not be possible without the postdoc’s contribution. Further, if the postdoc was truly being unreasonable, then the postdoc could make the case for sole first authorship based on contributing the most data to the paper, in addition to contributing ideas and writing the paper. The graduate student should consider that the postdoc may be suggesting co-first authorship in good faith.

As with any interpersonal conflict, clear communication is key. While it might be temporarily uncomfortable to voice their views and address this disagreement, it is critical to avoiding permanent damage to their working relationship. The pair should consider each other’s perspectives and potential alternatives. For example, if the graduate student is first author and the postdoc second, at a minimum they could include an author note in the manuscript that describes the contribution of each author. This would make it clear the scope of the postdoc’s contribution, if they decided not to go with co-first authorship. Also, the graduate student should consider their assumptions about co-first authorship. Maybe they assume it makes it appear they contributed less, but instead, perhaps co-first authorship highlights their collaborative approach to science. Collaboration is a desirable quality many (although arguably not all) research organizations look for when they are hiring.

They will also need to speak with others for advice. The pair should definitely speak with the PI who could provide input about how these cases have been handled in the past. Ultimately, if they cannot reach an agreement, the PI, who is likely to be the last or “senior” author, may make the final decision. They should also speak to the other graduate student who is an author.

If either individual is upset with the situation, they will want to discuss it when they have had time to cool down. This might mean taking a day before discussing, or speaking with someone outside of the lab for support. Ideally, all authors on this paper would have initiated this conversation earlier, and the standards in the lab for first authorship would be discussed routinely. Clear communication may have avoided the conflict.

HOW TO USE DECISION-MAKING STRATEGIES TO NAVIGATE CHALLENGES

We have provided advice on some specific challenges you might encounter in research. This final section covers our overarching recommendation that you adopt a set of ethical decision-making strategies. These strategies help researchers address challenges by helping them think through a problem and possible alternatives ( McIntosh et al., 2020 ). The strategies encourage you to gather information, examine possible outcomes, consider your assumptions, and address emotional reactions before acting. They are especially helpful when you are uncertain how to proceed, face a new problem, or when the consequences of a decision could negatively impact you or others. The strategies also help people be honest with themselves, such as when they are discounting important factors or have competing goals, by encouraging them to identify outside perspectives and test their motivations. You can remember the strategies using the acronym SMART .

1. S eek Help

Obtain input from others who can be objective and that you trust. They can assist you with assessing the situation, predicting possible outcomes, and identifying potential options. They can also provide you with support. Individuals to consult may be peers, other faculty, or people in your personal life. It is important that you trust the people you talk with, but it is also good when they challenge your perspective, or encourage you to think in a new way about a problem. Keep in mind that people such as program directors and university ombudsmen are often available for confidential, objective advice.

2. M anage Emotions

Consider your emotional reaction to the situation and how it might influence your assessment of the situation, and your potential decisions and actions. In particular, identify negative emotions, like frustration, anxiety, fear, and anger, as they particularly tend to diminish decision-making and the quality of interactions with others. Take time to address these emotions before acting, for example, by exercising, listening to music, or simply taking a day before responding.

3. A nticipate Consequences

Think about how the situation could turn out. This includes for you, for the research team, and anyone else involved. Consider the short, middle-term, and longer-term impacts of the problem and your potential approach to addressing the situation. Ideally, it is possible to identify win-win outcomes. Often, however, in tough professional situations, you may need to select the best option from among several that are not ideal.

4. R ecognize Rules and Context

Determine if any ethical principles, professional policies, or rules apply that might help guide your choices. For instance, if the problem involves an authorship dispute, consider the authorship guidelines that apply. Recognizing the context means considering the situational factors that could impact your options and how you proceed. For example, factors such as the reality that ultimately the PI may have the final decision about authorship.

5. T est Assumptions and Motives

Examine your beliefs about the situation and whether any of your thoughts may not be justified. This includes critically examining the personal motivations and goals that are driving your interpretation of the problem and thoughts about how to resolve it.

These strategies do not have to be engaged in order, and they are interrelated. For example, seeking help can help you manage emotions, test assumptions, and anticipate consequences. Go back to the scenarios and our advice throughout this article, and you will see many of our suggestions align with these strategies. Practice applying SMART strategies when you encounter a problem and they will become more natural.

Learning practices for responsible research will be the foundation for your success in graduate school and your career. We encourage you to be reflective and intentional as you learn and hope that our advice helps you along the way.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported by the National Human Genome Research Institute (Antes, K01HG008990) and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1 TR002345).

LITERATURE CITED

• Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, & Martinson BC (2007). What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have To Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-Funded Scientists . Academic Medicine , 82 ( 9 ), 853–860. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f764c [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, Brown RP, Murphy ST, Waples EP, Mumford MD, Connelly S, & Devenport LD (2007). Personality and Ethical Decision-Making in Research: The Role of Perceptions of Self and Others . Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics , 2 ( 4 ), 15–34. doi: 10.1525/jer.2007.2.4.15 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, English T, Baldwin KA, & DuBois JM (2018). The Role of Culture and Acculturation in Researchers’ Perceptions of Rules in Science . Science and Engineering Ethics , 24 ( 2 ), 361–391. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9876-4 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, Kuykendall A, & DuBois JM (2019a). The Lab Management Practices of “Research Exemplars” that Foster Research Rigor and Regulatory Compliance: A Qualitative Study of Successful Principal Investigators . PloS One , 14 ( 4 ), e0214595. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214595 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, Kuykendall A, & DuBois JM (2019b). Leading for Research Excellence and Integrity: A Qualitative Investigation of the Relationship-Building Practices of Exemplary Principal Investigators . Accountability in Research , 26 ( 3 ), 198–226. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2019.1611429 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, & Maggi LB Jr. (2021). How to Navigate Trainee-Mentor Relationships and Interpersonal Dynamics in the Lab . Current Protocols Essential Laboratory Techniques. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Asplund M, & Welle CG (2018). Advancing Science: How Bias Holds Us Back . Neuron , 99 ( 4 ), 635–639. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2018.07.045 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baker M (2016). Is There a Reproducibility Crisis? Nature , 533 , 452–454. doi: 10.1038/533452a [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barba LA (2016). The Hard Road to Reproducibility . Science , 354 ( 6308 ), 142. doi: 10.1126/science.354.6308.142 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Beall’s List of Potential Predatory Journals and Publishers . (2020). Retrieved from https://beallslist.net/#update [ Google Scholar ]
• Carroll HA, Toumpakari Z, Johnson L, & Betts JA (2017). The Perceived Feasibility of Methods to Reduce Publication Bias . PloS One , 12 ( 10 ), e0186472–e0186472. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186472 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chappell B (2019). Duke Whistleblower Gets More Than $33 Million in Research Fraud Settlement . NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2019/03/25/706604033/duke-whistleblower-gets-more-than-33-million-in-research-fraud-settlement [ Google Scholar ]
• Davis MS, Riske-Morris M, & Diaz SR (2007). Causal Factors Implicated in Research Misconduct: Evidence from ORI Case Files . Science and Engineering Ethics , 13 ( 4 ), 395–414. doi: 10.1007/s11948-007-9045-2 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DeMets DL (1999). Statistics and Ethics in Medical Research . Science and Engineering Ethics , 5 ( 1 ), 97–117. doi: 10.1007/s11948-999-0059-9 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Department of Health and Human Services. (2005). 42 CFR Parts 50 and 93 Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct; Final Rule. Retrieved from https://ori.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/42_cfr_parts_50_and_93_2005.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• DePellegrin TA, & Johnston M (2015). An Arbitrary Line in the Sand: Rising Scientists Confront the Impact Factor . Genetics , 201 ( 3 ), 811–813. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM, Anderson EE, Chibnall J, Carroll K, Gibb T, Ogbuka C, & Rubbelke T (2013). Understanding Research Misconduct: A Comparative Analysis of 120 Cases of Professional Wrongdoing . Account Res , 20 ( 5–6 ), 320–338. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2013.822248 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM, & Antes AL (2018). Five Dimensions of Research Ethics: A Stakeholder Framework for Creating a Climate of Research Integrity . Academic Medicine , 93 ( 4 ), 550–555. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001966 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Else H (2018). Does Science have a Bullying Problem? Nature , 563 , 616–618. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-07532-5 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, & Grady C (2000). What Makes Clinical Research Ethical ? Journal of the American Medical Association , 283 ( 20 ), 2701–2711. doi:jsc90374 [pii] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Evans TM, Bira L, Gastelum JB, Weiss LT, & Vanderford NL (2018). Evidence for a Mental Health Crisis in Graduate Education . Nature Biotechnology , 36 ( 3 ), 282–284. doi: 10.1038/nbt.4089 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frank DJ (2018). How to Write a Research Manuscript . Current Protocols Essential Laboratory Techniques , 16 ( 1 ), e20. doi: 10.1002/cpet.20 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goodman SN, Fanelli D, & Ioannidis JPA (2016). What Does Research Reproducibility Mean? Science Translational Medicine , 8 ( 341 ), 341ps312. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf5027 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grudniewicz A, Moher D, Cobey KD, Bryson GL, Cukier S, Allen K, … Lalu MM (2019). Predatory journals: no definition, no defence . Nature , 576 ( 7786 ), 210–212. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-03759-y [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Head ML, Holman L, Lanfear R, Kahn AT, & Jennions MD (2015). The Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science . PLoS Biology , 13 ( 3 ), e1002106. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002106 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hofstra B, Kulkarni VV, Munoz-Najar Galvez S, He B, Jurafsky D, & McFarland DA (2020). The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 117 ( 17 ), 9284. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1915378117 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (2020). Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors . Retrieved from http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
• Keith-Spiegel P, Sieber J, & Koocher GP (2010). Responding to Research Wrongdoing: A User-Friendly Guide . Retrieved from http://users.neo.registeredsite.com/1/4/0/20883041/assets/RRW_11-10.pdf
• McIntosh T, Antes AL, & DuBois JM (2020). Navigating Complex, Ethical Problems in Professional Life: A Guide to Teaching SMART Strategies for Decision-Making . Journal of Academic Ethics . doi: 10.1007/s10805-020-09369-y [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meyers LC, Brown AM, Moneta-Koehler L, & Chalkley R (2018). Survey of Checkpoints along the Pathway to Diverse Biomedical Research Faculty . PloS One , 13 ( 1 ), e0190606–e0190606. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190606 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Munafò MR, Nosek BA, Bishop DVM, Button KS, Chambers CD, Percie du Sert N, … Ioannidis JPA (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science . Nature Human Behaviour , 1 ( 1 ), 0021. doi: 10.1038/s41562-016-0021 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Academies of Science. (2009). On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research . Washington DC: National Academics Press. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine. (2017). Fostering Integrity in Research . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine. (2018a). An American Crisis: The Growing Absence of Black Men in Medicine and Science: Proceedings of a Joint Workshop . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine. (2018b). Sexual harassment of women: climate, culture, and consequences in academic sciences, engineering, and medicine : National Academies Press. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Institutes of Health. (2009). Update on the Requirement for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research . NOT-OD-10-019 . Retrieved from https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-10-019.html
• National Science Foundation. (2017). Important Notice No. 140 Training in Responsible Conduct of Research – A Reminder of the NSF Requirement . Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/issuances/in140.jsp
• No Place for Bullies in Science. (2018). Nature , 559 ( 7713 ), 151. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-05683-z [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Norris D, Dirnagl U, Zigmond MJ, Thompson-Peer K, & Chow TT (2018). Health Tips for Research Groups . Nature , 557 , 302–304. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-05146-5 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nosek BA, Alter G, Banks GC, Borsboom D, Bowman SD, Breckler SJ, … Yarkoni T (2015). Scientific Standards . Promoting an Open Research Culture. Science , 348 ( 6242 ), 1422–1425. doi: 10.1126/science.aab2374 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nuzzo R (2015). How Scientists Fool Themselves - and How They Can Stop . Nature , 526 , 182–185. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Connor A (2018). More Evidence that Nutrition Studies Don’t Always Add Up . The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/29/sunday-review/cornell-food-scientist-wansink-misconduct.html [ Google Scholar ]
• Park A (2012). Great Science Frauds . Time. Retrieved from https://healthland.time.com/2012/01/13/great-science-frauds/slide/the-baltimore-case/ [ Google Scholar ]
• Plemmons DK, Baranski EN, Harp K, Lo DD, Soderberg CK, Errington TM, … Esterling KM (2020). A Randomized Trial of a Lab-embedded Discourse Intervention to Improve Research Ethics . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 117 ( 3 ), 1389. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1917848117 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Research Institutions Must Put the Health of Labs First. (2018). Nature , 557 ( 7705 ), 279–280. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-05159-0 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Research Integrity is Much More Than Misconduct . (2019). ( 570 ). doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-01727-0 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Resnik DB (2011). Scientific Research and the Public Trust . Science and Engineering Ethics , 17 ( 3 ), 399–409. doi: 10.1007/s11948-010-9210-x [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roper RL (2019). Does Gender Bias Still Affect Women in Science? Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews , 83 ( 3 ), e00018–00019. doi: 10.1128/MMBR.00018-19 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shamoo AE, & Resnik DB (2015). Responsible Conduct of Research (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Steneck NH (2007). ORI Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research (Updated ed.). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. [ Google Scholar ]
• Winchester C (2018). Give Every Paper a Read for Reproducibility . Nature , 557 , 281. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-05140-x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• Section 1: Home
• Narrowing Your Topic
• Problem Statement

Purpose Statement Overview

Writing an effective purpose statement, best practices for writing your purpose statement, sample purpose statements.

• Conceptual Framework
• Avoiding Common Mistakes
• Synthesis and Analysis in Writing Support This link opens in a new window
• Qualitative Research Questions This link opens in a new window
• Quantitative Research Questions This link opens in a new window
• Qualitative & Quantitative Research Support with the ASC This link opens in a new window
• Library Research Consultations This link opens in a new window
• Library Guide: Research Process This link opens in a new window
• ASC Guide: Outlining and Annotating This link opens in a new window
• Library Guide: Organizing Research & Citations This link opens in a new window
• Library Guide: RefWorks This link opens in a new window
• Library Guide: Copyright Information This link opens in a new window

Purpose Statement 

The purpose statement succinctly explains the objectives of the doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice. These objectives must directly address the problem. The purpose statement also identifies the project methodology and design.

A problem and a missing piece in combination can lead to different objectives, and hence, different purpose statements. 

The purpose of the applied doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice must not only align with the problem and address a missing piece; it must also align with the chosen project method. In fact, the template requires you to name the research method at the very beginning of the purpose statement. In general, quantitative studies involve “closed-ended” research verbs such as determine, measure, correlate, explain, compare, validate, identify, or examine; whereas qualitative studies involve “open-ended” research verbs such as explore, understand, narrate, articulate [meanings], discover, or develop.  

Qualitative Purpose Statement

A qualitative purpose statement following the color-coded problem statement (assumed here to be low well-being among financial sector employees) + missing piece (lack of research on followers of mid-level managers), might start like this: 

In response to declining levels of employee well-being, the purpose of the qualitative phenomenology was to explore and understand the lived experiences related to the well-being of the followers of novice mid-level managers in the financial services industry.  The levels of follower well-being have been shown to correlate to employee morale, turnover intention, and customer orientation (Eren et al., 2013).  A combined framework of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory and the employee well-being concept informed the research questions and supported the inquiry, analysis, and interpretation of the findings to be applied in the financial services industry.   

Quantitative Purpose Statement

A quantitative purpose statement for the same problem and gap might start like this: 

In response to declining levels of employee well-being, the purpose of the quantitative correlational study was to determine which leadership factors predict employee well-being of the followers of novice mid-level managers to be applied in the financial services industry. Leadership factors were measured by the Leader Member Exchange (LMX) assessment framework by Mantlekow (2015), and employee well-being was conceptualized as a compound variable consisting of self-reported turnover-intent and psychological test scores from the Mental Health Survey (MHS) developed by Johns Hopkins University researchers.  

Both of these purpose statements reflect viable research strategies and both align with the problem and gap so it’s up to the practitioner to design a doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice in a manner that reflects personal preferences and desired study outcomes. Note that the quantitative research purpose incorporates operationalized concepts, or variables; that reflect the way the practitioner intends to measure the key concepts under study; whereas the qualitative purpose statement isn’t about translating the concepts under study as variables but instead aim to explore and understand the core research phenomenon.

An important step in the successful completion of an Applied Doctoral Project/Dissertation in Practice is starting off with an accurate and precise purpose statement.  Read through the information below to get some general ideas or guidelines related to effective purpose statements and how to compose them.  All this information comes from faculty who want you to succeed in the process.

General Guidelines

Keep these in mind as you begin to compose your purpose statement

Good purpose statements:

• Flow from the problem statement and actually address the proposed problem
• Are concise and clear
• Answer the question ‘Why are you doing this project?’
• Match the methodology to your  questions
• Have a ‘hook’ to get the reader’s attention
• Set the stage by clearly stating, “The purpose of this (qualitative or quantitative) study is to ...”

Writing your Purpose Statement:

• The Problem Statement is why I am doing the project or dissertation-in-practice
• The Purpose Statement is what type of project or study I am doing to fit or address the problem

The Purpose Statement includes:

• Design and Method of Study
• Specific Population

Creswell (2002) suggested that purpose statements in qualitative projects or studies include deliberate phrasing to alert the reader to the purpose statement. Verbs are key to indicate what will take place in the project or study research and the use of non-directional language that does not suggest an outcome. A purpose statement should focus on a single idea or concept with a broad definition of that idea or concept. How the concept will be investigated should also be included, as well as participants in the study and study locations to give the reader a sense of with whom and where the project or study will occur.  

Creswell (2003) advised the following script for purpose statements in qualitative methodology:

“The purpose of this qualitative_________________ (strategy of inquiry, such as ethnography, case study, or other type) study is (was? will be?) to ________________ (understand? describe? develop? discover?) the _________________(central phenomenon being studied) for ______________ (the participants, such as the individual, groups, organization) at __________(site). At this stage in the project, the __________ (central phenomenon being studied) will be generally defined as ___________________ (provide a general definition)” (pg. 90).

Quantitative Purpose Statement

Creswell (2003) offers vast differences between the purpose statements written for qualitative methodology and those written for quantitative methodology, particularly with respect to language and the inclusion of variables. The comparison of variables is often a focus of quantitative methodology with the variables distinguishable by either the temporal order or how they are measured. As with qualitative purpose statements, Creswell (2003) recommends the use of deliberate language to alert the reader to the purpose of the project or study, though quantitative purpose statements also include the theory or conceptual framework guiding the project or study, the variables that are being studied, and how those variables are related.  

Creswell (2003) suggests the following script for drafting purpose statements in quantitative projects:

“The purpose of this _____________________ (experiment? survey?) project is (was? will be?) to test the theory of _________________that _________________ (compares? relates?) the ___________(independent variable) to _________________________(dependent variable), controlling for _______________________ (control variables) for ___________________ (participants) at _________________________ (site). The independent variable(s) _____________________ will be generally defined as _______________________ (provide a general definition). The dependent variable(s) will be generally defined as _____________________ (provide a general definition), and the control and intervening variables(s), _________________ (identify the control and intervening variables) will be statistically controlled in this project” (pg. 97).

Creswell, J. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research.  Merrill Prentice Hall. 7.  Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.).  SAGE Publications.

Always keep in mind that the process is iterative, and your writing, over time, will be refined as clarity is gradually achieved. Most of the time, greater clarity for the purpose statement and other components is the result of a growing understanding of the literature in the field. As you increasingly master the literature you will also increasingly clarify the purpose of your project or study. 

The purpose statement should flow directly from the problem statement. There should be clear and obvious alignment between the two, and that alignment will get tighter and more pronounced as your work progresses.

The purpose statement should specifically address the reason for conducting the project or study, with emphasis on the word specifically. There should not be any doubt in your readers’ minds as to the purpose of your project or study. To achieve this level of clarity, you will need to also ensure there is no doubt in your mind as to the purpose of your project or study. 

You may benefit from stopping your work during the process when insight strikes you in order to write about that insight while it is still fresh in your mind. This pause can help you clarify all aspects of the project or study, including clarifying its purpose. 

Your Chair and your committee members can help you to clarify the purpose of your project or dissertation-in-practice, so carefully attend to any feedback they offer.

The purpose statement should reflect the questions proposed and vice versa. The chain of alignment that began with the problem description and continues on to the purpose, questions, and methodology must be respected at all times during development. You are to succinctly describe the overarching goal of the project or dissertation-in-practice that reflects the questions. Each question narrows and focuses the purpose statement. Conversely, the purpose statement encompasses all of the questions. 

Identify in the purpose statement the methodology as quantitative, qualitative or mixed (i.e., “The purpose of this [qualitative/quantitative/mixed] study is to ...)

Follow the initial declaration of purpose with a brief overview of how the project or study will be conducted, including instruments, data, with whom (sample), and where (as applicable). Identify variables/constructs and/or phenomenon/concept/idea. Since this section is to be a concise paragraph, emphasis must be placed on the word brief. However, adding these details will give your readers a very clear picture of the purpose of your project or dissertation-in-practice.

Developing the purpose section is usually not achieved in a single flash of insight. The process involves a great deal of reading to find out what other practitioners have done to address the problem you have identified. The purpose section could well be the most important paragraph you write during your academic career, and every word should be carefully selected. Think of it as the DNA of your project or study. Everything else you write should emerge directly and clearly from your purpose statement. In turn, your purpose statement should emerge directly and clearly from your problem description. It is good practice to print out your problem statement and purpose statement and keep them in front of you as you work on each part of your project or dissertation-in-practice in order to ensure alignment.

It is helpful to collect several project or dissertation-in-practice reports or literature similar to the one you envision creating. Extract the problem descriptions and purpose statements of other authors and compare them in order to sharpen your thinking about your own work.  Comparing how other authors have handled the many challenges you are facing can be an invaluable exercise. Keep in mind that individual universities use their own tailored protocols for presenting key components, so your review of these purpose statements should focus on content rather than form.

Once your purpose statement is set, it must be consistently presented throughout the project or dissertation-in-practice. This consistency may require some recursive editing because the way you articulate your purpose may evolve as you work on various aspects of your project or dissertation-in-practice. Whenever you make an adjustment to your purpose statement, you should carefully follow up on the editing and conceptual ramifications throughout the entire document.

In establishing your purpose, you should NOT advocate for a particular outcome. Your review of the literature should be done to answer questions, not to prove a point. As a scholar-practitioner, you are to inquire with an open mind, and even when you come to the work with clear assumptions, your job is to support the validity of the conclusions reached. For example, you would not say the purpose of your project or study is to demonstrate that there is a relationship between two variables. Such a statement presupposes you know the answer before your review of the literature conducted and promotes or supports (advocates on behalf of) a particular outcome. A more appropriate purpose statement would be to examine or explore the relationship between two variables. 

Your purpose statement should not imply that you are going to prove something. You may be surprised to learn that we cannot prove anything in scholarly review of the literature for two reasons. First, in quantitative analyses, statistical tests calculate the probability that something is true rather than establishing it as true. Second, in qualitative methodology, the study can only purport to describe what is occurring from the perspective of the participants. Whether or not the phenomenon they are describing is true in a larger context is not knowable. We cannot observe the phenomenon in all settings and in all circumstances. 

Here are some example purpose statements for your consideration.

Purpose Statement 1

The purpose of this qualitative project was to determine how participation in service-learning in an alternative school impacted students academically, civically, and personally.  There is ample evidence demonstrating the failure of schools for students at-risk; however, there is still a need to demonstrate why these students are successful in non-traditional educational programs like the service-learning model used at TDS.  This study was unique in that it examined one alternative school’s approach to service-learning in a setting where students not only serve, but faculty serve as volunteer teachers.  The use of a constructivist approach in service-learning in an alternative school setting was examined in an effort to determine whether service-learning participation contributes positively to academic, personal, and civic gain for students, and to examine student and teacher views regarding the overall outcomes of service-learning.  This study was completed using an ethnographic approach that included observations, content analysis, and interviews with teachers at The David School.

Purpose Statement 2

The purpose of this quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional linear, multiple regression design study was to investigate the relationship among early childhood teachers’ self-reported assessment of multicultural awareness as measured by responses from the Teacher Multicultural Attitude Survey (TMAS) and supervisors’ observed assessment of teachers’ multicultural competency skills as measured by the Multicultural Teaching Competency Scale (MTCS) survey. Demographic data such as number of multicultural training hours, years teaching in Dubai, curriculum program at current school, and age were also examined and their relationship to multicultural teaching competency. The study took place in the emirate of Dubai where there were 14,333 expatriate teachers employed in private schools (KHDA, 2013b). 

Purpose Statement 3

The purpose of this quantitative, non-experimental project is to examine the degree to which stages of change, gender, acculturation level and trauma types predicts the reluctance of Arab refugees, aged 18 and over, in the Dearborn, MI area, to seek professional help for their mental health needs. This study will utilize four instruments to measure these variables: University of Rhode Island Change Assessment (URICA: DiClemente & Hughes, 1990); Cumulative Trauma Scale (Kira, 2012); Acculturation Rating Scale for Arabic Americans-II Arabic and English (ARSAA-IIA, ARSAA-IIE: Jadalla & Lee, 2013), and a demographic survey. This study will examine 1) the relationship between stages of change, gender, acculturation levels, and trauma types and Arab refugees’ help-seeking behavior, 2) the degree to which any of these variables can predict Arab refugee help-seeking behavior.  Additionally, the outcome of this study could provide researchers and clinicians with a stage-based model, TTM, for measuring Arab refugees’ help-seeking behavior and lay a foundation for how TTM can help target the clinical needs of Arab refugees. Lastly, this attempt to apply the TTM model to Arab refugees’ condition could lay the foundation for future research to investigate the application of TTM to clinical work among refugee populations.

Purpose Statement 4

The purpose of this qualitative, phenomenological project is to describe the lived experiences of LLM for 10 EFL learners in rural Guatemala and to utilize that data to determine how it conforms to, or possibly challenges, current theoretical conceptions of LLM. In accordance with Morse’s (1994) suggestion that a phenomenological study should utilize at least six participants, this study utilized semi-structured interviews with 10 EFL learners to explore why and how they have experienced the motivation to learn English throughout their lives. The methodology of horizontalization was used to break the interview protocols into individual units of meaning before analyzing these units to extract the overarching themes (Moustakas, 1994). These themes were then interpreted into a detailed description of LLM as experienced by EFL students in this context. Finally, the resulting description was analyzed to discover how these learners’ lived experiences with LLM conformed with and/or diverged from current theories of LLM.

Purpose Statement 5

The purpose of this qualitative, embedded, multiple case project was to examine how both parent-child attachment relationships are impacted by the quality of the paternal and maternal caregiver-child interactions that occur throughout a maternal deployment, within the context of dual-military couples. In order to examine this phenomenon, an embedded, multiple case study was conducted, utilizing an attachment systems metatheory perspective. The study included four dual-military couples who experienced a maternal deployment to Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) or Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) when they had at least one child between 8 weeks-old to 5 years-old.  Each member of the couple participated in an individual, semi-structured interview with the researcher and completed the Parenting Relationship Questionnaire (PRQ). “The PRQ is designed to capture a parent’s perspective on the parent-child relationship” (Pearson, 2012, para. 1) and was used within the proposed study for this purpose. The PRQ was utilized to triangulate the data (Bekhet & Zauszniewski, 2012) as well as to provide some additional information on the parents’ perspective of the quality of the parent-child attachment relationship in regards to communication, discipline, parenting confidence, relationship satisfaction, and time spent together (Pearson, 2012). The researcher utilized the semi-structured interview to collect information regarding the parents' perspectives of the quality of their parental caregiver behaviors during the deployment cycle, the mother's parent-child interactions while deployed, the behavior of the child or children at time of reunification, and the strategies or behaviors the parents believe may have contributed to their child's behavior at the time of reunification. The results of this project may be utilized by the military, and by civilian providers, to develop proactive and preventive measures that both providers and parents can implement, to address any potential adverse effects on the parent-child attachment relationship, identified through the proposed study. The results of this project may also be utilized to further refine and understand the integration of attachment theory and systems theory, in both clinical and research settings, within the field of marriage and family therapy. 

Compiled by Dr. Darren Adamson, Department Chair, School of Social and Behavioral Sciences 

• << Previous: Problem Statement
• Next: Alignment >>
• Last Updated: Apr 24, 2024 2:48 PM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1013602

© Copyright 2024 National University. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy | Consumer Information

• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

• Virtual Tour
• Staff Directory
• En Español

You are here

Science, health, and public trust.

September 8, 2021

Explaining How Research Works

We’ve heard “follow the science” a lot during the pandemic. But it seems science has taken us on a long and winding road filled with twists and turns, even changing directions at times. That’s led some people to feel they can’t trust science. But when what we know changes, it often means science is working.

Explaining the scientific process may be one way that science communicators can help maintain public trust in science. Placing research in the bigger context of its field and where it fits into the scientific process can help people better understand and interpret new findings as they emerge. A single study usually uncovers only a piece of a larger puzzle.

Questions about how the world works are often investigated on many different levels. For example, scientists can look at the different atoms in a molecule, cells in a tissue, or how different tissues or systems affect each other. Researchers often must choose one or a finite number of ways to investigate a question. It can take many different studies using different approaches to start piecing the whole picture together.

Sometimes it might seem like research results contradict each other. But often, studies are just looking at different aspects of the same problem. Researchers can also investigate a question using different techniques or timeframes. That may lead them to arrive at different conclusions from the same data.

Using the data available at the time of their study, scientists develop different explanations, or models. New information may mean that a novel model needs to be developed to account for it. The models that prevail are those that can withstand the test of time and incorporate new information. Science is a constantly evolving and self-correcting process.

Scientists gain more confidence about a model through the scientific process. They replicate each other’s work. They present at conferences. And papers undergo peer review, in which experts in the field review the work before it can be published in scientific journals. This helps ensure that the study is up to current scientific standards and maintains a level of integrity. Peer reviewers may find problems with the experiments or think different experiments are needed to justify the conclusions. They might even offer new ways to interpret the data.

It’s important for science communicators to consider which stage a study is at in the scientific process when deciding whether to cover it. Some studies are posted on preprint servers for other scientists to start weighing in on and haven’t yet been fully vetted. Results that haven't yet been subjected to scientific scrutiny should be reported on with care and context to avoid confusion or frustration from readers.

We’ve developed a one-page guide, "How Research Works: Understanding the Process of Science" to help communicators put the process of science into perspective. We hope it can serve as a useful resource to help explain why science changes—and why it’s important to expect that change. Please take a look and share your thoughts with us by sending an email to  [email protected].

Below are some additional resources:

• Discoveries in Basic Science: A Perfectly Imperfect Process
• When Clinical Research Is in the News
• What is Basic Science and Why is it Important?
• ​ What is a Research Organism?
• What Are Clinical Trials and Studies?
• Basic Research – Digital Media Kit
• Decoding Science: How Does Science Know What It Knows? (NAS)
• Can Science Help People Make Decisions ? (NAS)

Connect with Us

• More Social Media from NIH

Research Aims and Objectives: The dynamic duo for successful research

Picture yourself on a road trip without a destination in mind — driving aimlessly, not knowing where you’re headed or how to get there. Similarly, your research is navigated by well-defined research aims and objectives. Research aims and objectives are the foundation of any research project. They provide a clear direction and purpose for the study, ensuring that you stay focused and on track throughout the process. They are your trusted navigational tools, leading you to success.

Understanding the relationship between research objectives and aims is crucial to any research project’s success, and we’re here to break it down for you in this article. Here, we’ll explore the importance of research aims and objectives, understand their differences, and delve into the impact they have on the quality of research.

Understanding the Difference between Research Aims and Objectives

In research, aims and objectives are two important components but are often used interchangeably. Though they may sound similar, they are distinct and serve different purposes.

Research Aims:

Research aims are broad statements that describe the overall purpose of your study. They provide a general direction for your study and indicate the intended achievements of your research. Aims are usually written in a general and abstract manner describing the ultimate goal of the research.

Research Objectives:

Research objectives are specific, measurable, and achievable goals that you aim to accomplish within a specified timeframe. They break down the research aims into smaller, more manageable components and provide a clear picture of what you want to achieve and how you plan to achieve it.

In the example, the objectives provide specific targets that must be achieved to reach the aim. Essentially, aims provide the overall direction for the research while objectives provide specific targets that must be achieved to accomplish the aims. Aims provide a broad context for the research, while the objectives provide smaller steps that the researcher must take to accomplish the overall research goals. To illustrate, when planning a road trip, your research aim is the destination you want to reach, and your research objectives are the specific routes you need to take to get there.

Aims and objectives are interconnected. Objectives play a key role in defining the research methodology, providing a roadmap for how you’ll collect and analyze data, while aim is the final destination, which represents the ultimate goal of your research. By setting specific goals, you’ll be able to design a research plan that helps you achieve your objectives and, ultimately, your research aim.

Importance of Well-defined Aims and Objectives

The impact of clear research aims and objectives on the quality of research cannot be understated. But it’s not enough to simply have aims and objectives. Well-defined research aims and objectives are important for several reasons:

• Provides direction: Clear aims and well-defined objectives provide a specific direction for your research study, ensuring that the research stays focused on a specific topic or problem. This helps to prevent the research from becoming too broad or unfocused, and ensures that the study remains relevant and meaningful.
• Guides research design: The research aim and objectives help guide the research design and methodology, ensuring that your study is designed in a way that will answer the research questions and achieve the research objectives.
• Helps with resource allocation: Clear research aims and objectives helps you to allocate resources effectively , including time, financial resources, human resources, and other required materials. With a well-defined aim and objectives, you can identify the resources required to conduct the research, and allocate them in a way that maximizes efficiency and productivity.
• Assists in evaluation: Clearly specified research aims and objectives allow for effective evaluation of your research project’s success. You can assess whether the research has achieved its objectives, and whether the aim has been met. This evaluation process can help to identify areas of the research project that may require further attention or modification.
• Enhances communication: Well-defined research aims and objectives help to enhance communication among the research team, stakeholders, funding agencies, and other interested parties. Clear aims and objectives ensure that everyone involved in your research project understands the purpose and goals of the study. This can help to foster collaboration and ensure that everyone is working towards the same end goal.

How to Formulate Research Aims and Objectives

Formulating effective research aims and objectives involves a systematic process to ensure that they are clear, specific, achievable, and relevant. Start by asking yourself what you want to achieve through your research. What impact do you want your research to have? Once you have a clear understanding of your aims, you can then break them down into specific, achievable objectives. Here are some steps you can follow when developing research aims and objectives:

• Identify the research question : Clearly identify the questions you want to answer through your research. This will help you define the scope of your research. Understanding the characteristics of a good research question will help you generate clearer aims and objectives.
• Conduct literature review : When defining your research aim and objectives, it’s important to conduct a literature review to identify key concepts, theories, and methods related to your research problem or question. Conducting a thorough literature review can help you understand what research has been done in the area and what gaps exist in the literature.
• Identify the research aim: Develop a research aim that summarizes the overarching goal of your research. The research aim should be broad and concise.
• Develop research objectives: Based on your research questions and research aim, develop specific research objectives that outline what you intend to achieve through your research. These objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART).
• Use action verbs: Use action verbs such as “investigate,” “examine,” “analyze,” and “compare” to describe your research aims and objectives. This makes them more specific and measurable.
• Ensure alignment with research question: Ensure that the research aim and objectives are aligned with the research question. This helps to ensure that the research remains focused and that the objectives are specific enough to answer your research question.
• Refine and revise: Once the research aim and objectives have been developed, refine and revise them as needed. Seek feedback from your colleagues, mentors, or supervisors to ensure that they are clear, concise, and achievable within the given resources and timeframe.
• Communicate: After finalizing the research aim and objectives, they should be communicated to the research team, stakeholders, and other interested parties. This helps to ensure that everyone is working towards the same end goal and understands the purpose of the study.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid While Formulating Aims and Objectives

There are several common mistakes that researchers can make when writing research aims and objectives. These include:

• Being too broad or vague: Aims and objectives that are too general or unclear can lead to confusion and lack of focus. It is important to ensure that the aims and objectives are concise and clear.
• Being too narrow or specific: On the other hand, aims and objectives that are too narrow or specific may limit the scope of the research and make it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions or implications.
• Being too ambitious: While it is important to aim high, being too ambitious with the aims and objectives can lead to unrealistic expectations and can be difficult to achieve within the constraints of the research project.
• Lack of alignment: The aims and objectives should be directly linked to the research questions being investigated. Otherwise, this will lead to a lack of coherence in the research project.
• Lack of feasibility: The aims and objectives should be achievable within the constraints of the research project, including time, budget, and resources. Failing to consider feasibility may cause compromise of the research quality.
• Failing to consider ethical considerations: The aims and objectives should take into account any ethical considerations, such as ensuring the safety and well-being of study participants.
• Failing to involve all stakeholders: It’s important to involve all relevant stakeholders, such as participants, supervisors, and funding agencies, in the development of the aims and objectives to ensure they are appropriate and relevant.

To avoid these common pitfalls, it is important to be specific, clear, relevant, and realistic when writing research aims and objectives. Seek feedback from colleagues or supervisors to ensure that the aims and objectives are aligned with the research problem , questions, and methodology, and are achievable within the constraints of the research project. It’s important to continually refine your aims and objectives as you go. As you progress in your research, it’s not uncommon for research aims and objectives to evolve slightly, but it’s important that they remain consistent with the study conducted and the research topic.

In summary, research aims and objectives are the backbone of any successful research project. They give you the ability to cut through the noise and hone in on what really matters. By setting clear goals and aligning them with your research questions and methodology, you can ensure that your research is relevant, impactful, and of the highest quality. So, before you hit the road on your research journey, make sure you have a clear destination and steps to get there. Let us know in the comments section below the challenges you faced and the strategies you followed while fomulating research aims and objectives! Also, feel free to reach out to us at any stage of your research or publication by using #AskEnago  and tagging @EnagoAcademy on Twitter , Facebook , and Quora . Happy researching!

This particular material has added important but overlooked concepts regarding my experiences in explaining research aims and objectives. Thank you

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Academic Essay Writing Made Simple: 4 types and tips

The pen is mightier than the sword, they say, and nowhere is this more evident…

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

Improving Research Manuscripts Using AI-Powered Insights: Enago reports for effective research communication

Language Quality Importance in Academia AI in Evaluating Language Quality Enago Language Reports Live Demo…

• AI in Academia
• Trending Now

Simplifying the Literature Review Journey — A comparative analysis of 5 AI summarization tools

Imagine having to skim through and read mountains of research papers and books, only to…

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

• Industry News
• Publishing Research
• Promoting Research
• Career Corner
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer Review Week 2024
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

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

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

45 CFR 164.501, 164.508, 164.512(i) (See also 45 CFR 164.514(e), 164.528, 164.532)  ( Download a copy in PDF ) Background

The HIPAA Privacy Rule establishes the conditions under which protected health information may be used or disclosed by covered entities for research purposes. Research is defined in the Privacy Rule as, “a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge.” See 45 CFR 164.501.  A covered entity may always use or disclose for research purposes health information which has been de-identified (in accordance with 45 CFR 164.502(d), and 164.514(a)-(c) of the Rule) without regard to the provisions below.

The Privacy Rule also defines the means by which individuals will be informed of uses and disclosures of their medical information for research purposes, and their rights to access information about them held by covered entities. Where research is concerned, the Privacy Rule protects the privacy of individually identifiable health information, while at the same time ensuring that researchers continue to have access to medical information necessary to conduct vital research. Currently, most research involving human subjects operates under the Common Rule (45 CFR Part 46, Subpart A) and/or the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) human subject protection regulations (21 CFR Parts 50 and 56), which have some provisions that are similar to, but separate from, the Privacy Rule’s provisions for research. These human subject protection regulations, which apply to most Federally-funded and to some privately funded research, include protections to help ensure the privacy of subjects and the confidentiality of information. The Privacy Rule builds upon these existing Federal protections. More importantly, the Privacy Rule creates equal standards of privacy protection for research governed by the existing Federal human subject regulations and research that is not. 

How the Rule Works  In the course of conducting research, researchers may obtain, create, use, and/or disclose individually identifiable health information. Under the Privacy Rule, covered entities are permitted to use and disclose protected health information for research with individual authorization, or without individual authorization under limited circumstances set forth in the Privacy Rule. Research Use/Disclosure Without Authorization. To use or disclose protected health information without authorization by the research participant, a covered entity must obtain one of the following: 

• Identification of the IRB or Privacy Board and the date on which the alteration or waiver of authorization was approved; 
• A statement that the IRB or Privacy Board has determined that the alteration or waiver of authorization, in whole or in part, satisfies the three criteria in the Rule; 
• A brief description of the protected health information for which use or access has been determined to be necessary by the IRB or Privacy Board;
• A statement that the alteration or waiver of authorization has been reviewed and approved under either normal or expedited review procedures; and 
• The signature of the chair or other member, as designated by the chair, of the IRB or the Privacy Board, as applicable. 

The following three criteria must be satisfied for an IRB or Privacy Board to approve a waiver of authorization under the Privacy Rule: 

• an adequate plan to protect the identifiers from improper use and disclosure; 
• an adequate plan to destroy the identifiers at the earliest opportunity consistent with conduct of the research, unless there is a health or research justification for retaining the identifiers or such retention is otherwise required by law; and 
• adequate written assurances that the protected health information will not be reused or disclosed to any other person or entity, except as required by law, for authorized oversight of the research project, or for other research for which the use or disclosure of protected health information would be permitted by this subpart; 
• The research could not practicably be conducted without the waiver or alteration; and 
• The research could not practicably be conducted without access to and use of the protected health information. 
• Preparatory to Research . Representations from the researcher, either in writing or orally, that the use or disclosure of the protected health information is solely to prepare a research protocol or for similar purposes preparatory to research, that the researcher will not remove any protected health information from the covered entity, and representation that protected health information for which access is sought is necessary for the research purpose. See 45 CFR 164.512(i)(1)(ii). This provision might be used, for example, to design a research study or to assess the feasibility of conducting a study.  The Privacy Rule does not prohibit a covered entity’s granting remote access to PHI to a researcher for activities that qualify as reviews preparatory to research, provided reasonable and appropriate safeguards are in place, as described in OCR’s guidance, Remote Access to PHI for Activities Preparatory to Research .
• Research on Protected Health Information of Decedents . Representations from the researcher, either in writing or orally, that the use or disclosure being sought is solely for research on the protected health information of decedents, that the protected health information being sought is necessary for the research, and, at the request of the covered entity, documentation of the death of the individuals about whom information is being sought. See 45 CFR 164.512(i)(1)(iii). 
• Establish the permitted uses and disclosures of the limited data set by the recipient, consistent with the purposes of the research, and which may not include any use or disclosure that would violate the Rule if done by the covered entity; 
• Limit who can use or receive the data; and 
• Not to use or disclose the information other than as permitted by the data use agreement or as otherwise required by law; 
• Use appropriate safeguards to prevent the use or disclosure of the information other than as provided for in the data use agreement; 
• Report to the covered entity any use or disclosure of the information not provided for by the data use agreement of which the recipient becomes aware; 
• Ensure that any agents, including a subcontractor, to whom the recipient provides the limited data set agrees to the same restrictions and conditions that apply to the recipient with respect to the limited data set; and
• Not to identify the information or contact the individual. 
• Unlike other authorizations, an authorization for a research purpose may state that the authorization does not expire, that there is no expiration date or event, or that the authorization continues until the “end of the research study”.
• An authorization for the use or disclosure of protected health information for a research study may be combined with a consent to participate in the research, or with any other legal permission related to the research study.
• An authorization for the use or disclosure of protected health information for a research study may be combined with an authorization for a different research activity, provided that, if research-related treatment is conditioned on the provision of one of the authorizations, such as in the context of a clinical trial, then the compound authorization must clearly differentiate between the conditioned and unconditioned components and provide the individual with an opportunity to opt in to the unconditioned research activity.
• An authorization may be obtained from an individual for uses and disclosures of protected health information for future research purposes, so long as the authorization adequately describes the future research such that it would be reasonable for the individual to expect that his or her protected health information could be used or disclosed for the future research purposes.
• New Guidance on HIPAA and individual authorization of uses and disclosures of protected health information for research.   This guidance explains certain requirements for an authorization to use or disclose PHI for future research.  The guidance also clarifies aspects of the individual’s right to revoke an authorization for research uses and disclosures of PHI.
• Research disclosures made pursuant to an individual’s authorization; 
• Disclosures of the limited data set to researchers with a data use agreement under 45 CFR 164.514(e). 

In addition, for disclosures of protected health information for research purposes without the individual’s authorization pursuant to 45 CFR164.512(i), and that involve at least 50 records, the Privacy Rule allows for a simplified accounting of such disclosures by covered entities. Under this simplified accounting provision, covered entities may provide individuals with a list of all protocols for which the patient’s protected health information may have been disclosed under 45 CFR 164.512(i), as well as the researcher’s name and contact information. Other requirements related to this simplified accounting provision are found in 45 CFR 164.528(b)(4). 

Transition Provisions. Under the Privacy Rule, a covered entity may use and disclose protected health information that was created or received for research, either before or after the applicable compliance date, if the covered entity obtained any one of the following prior to the compliance date

• An authorization or other express legal permission from an individual to use or disclose protected health information for the research; 
• The informed consent of the individual to participate in the research; 
• A waiver of authorization approved by either an IRB or a privacy board (in accordance with 45 CFR  164.512(i)(1)(i)); or
• A waiver of informed consent by an IRB in accordance with the Common Rule or an exception under FDA’s human subject protection regulations at 21 CFR 50.24. However, if a waiver of informed consent was obtained prior to the compliance date, but informed consent is subsequently sought after the compliance date, the covered entity must obtain the individual’s authorization as required at 45 CFR 164.508. For example, if there was a temporary waiver of informed consent for emergency research under the FDA’s human subject protection regulations, and informed consent was later sought after the compliance date, individual authorization would be required before the covered entity could use or disclose protected health information for the research after the waiver of informed consent was no longer valid. The Privacy Rule allows covered entities to rely on such express legal permission, informed consent, or waiver of authorization of informed consent, which they create or receive before the applicable compliance date, to use and disclose protected health information for specific research studies, as well as for future unspecified research that may be included in such permission.

OCR HIPAA Privacy December 3, 2002 Revised December 18, 2017

Back to Top

Other HIPAA and Research Resources

• HIPAA Privacy Rule Booklet for Research
• Clinical Research Fact Sheet
• Institutional Review Boards Fact Sheet
• HIPAA Authorization Fact Sheet and Sample Language
• Health Services Research Fact Sheet
• Information for Patients
• Research Repositories and Databases Fact Sheet
• View our Frequently Asked Questions

Disclaimer Policy: Links with this icon ( ) mean that you are leaving the HHS website.

• The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) cannot guarantee the accuracy of a non-federal website.
• Linking to a non-federal website does not mean that HHS or its employees endorse the sponsors, information, or products presented on the website. HHS links outside of itself to provide you with further information.
• You will be bound by the destination website's privacy policy and/or terms of service when you follow the link.
• HHS is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on private websites.

For more information on HHS's web notification policies, see Website Disclaimers .

• Search Please fill out this field.
• Manage Your Subscription
• Give a Gift Subscription
• Newsletters
• Sweepstakes

People Were Doing Cocaine in the 1600s, Research Shows

Researchers studying a crypt in Milan found that the coca plant may have been used “for recreational purposes”

North Wind Picture Archives via AP

People as far back as the 1600s were using cocaine , chewing on the leaves of the coca plant “for recreational purposes.” 

Researchers examined the human remains of the Ca’ Granda crypt in Milan, located underneath the Church of the Beata Vergine Annunciata . It was there that bodies of patients from the “pioneering hospital” Ospedale Maggiore — which “specialized in the medical treatment of acute illnesses among impoverished and disadvantaged individuals residing in the city” — were interned, researched published in the Journal of Archaeological Sciences says.

“Toxicological analyses performed on preserved brain tissues revealed the presence of the compounds of cocaine , benzoylecgonine, and hygrine in two cases,” the research says.

Nicolo Filippo Rosso/Bloomberg

Cocaine can degrade into benzoylecgonine, researchers said, adding that the presence of both molecules confirmed that “the individuals under investigation consumed the molecule.”

“However, it did not allow us to conclude whether the consumption was in the form of leaves or cocaine hydrochloride salts.”

That was determined by the presence of the third molecule, hygrine.

“Hygrine, in particular, indicated that cocaine intake occurred through the chewing of coca leaves,” the paper notes, as “hygrine (an alkaloid present in the leaves of Erythroxylum spp. only), was essential to determine that the molecules detected in these human remains derived from the chewing of coca leaves or from leaves brewed as a tea, consistent with the historical period.”

Never miss a story — sign up for  PEOPLE's free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories.

The paper notes that the presence of this plant in human remains from so long ago is “unprecendented,” as “the pharmacological archives of the hospital do not report the presence of the Erythroxylum spp. until the end of 19th century, which would indicate that the plant did not enter the hospital pharmacy until then.” 

The PEOPLE Puzzler crossword is here! How quickly can you solve it? Play now !

As the University of Oxford explains, Erythroxylum is the genus for the coca plant, and notes “In 1855 an anaesthetic alkaloid (cocaine) was isolated from coca leaves.”

The paper notes that the plant was not listed among the commonly dispensed medicines at the hospital, "suggesting that it may not have been administered at the hospital. Coca leaves may therefore have been chewed for their reinforcing properties or for recreational purposes.”

The new research "allows for a better understanding of how the use of cocaine has changed over the centuries in Europe," as the paper notes that products derived from the coca plant — which was commonly dispensed "as a medicine in the 19th century" — are now "the cause of 1/5 of overdose deaths across the world in the 20th century."

If you or someone you know is struggling with substance abuse, please contact the SAMHSA helpline at 1-800-662-HELP.

Related Articles

• Skip to global NPS navigation
• Skip to the main content
• Skip to the footer section

Exiting nps.gov

We found passion and purpose in new pollinator studies, pollinators are in danger, and national parks want to help. two early-career scientists piloted research projects to find out how they could..

By Grace Kowalski and Nina Crawford

Image credits: NPS / Grace Kowalski (left); NPS / Nina Crawford (right)

What are over 100 national parks buzzing about? Pollinator research! In recent years, pollinators like bees and butterflies have drastically declined in number. This is a problem because most flowering plants rely on pollinators to reproduce. People eat many pollinator-dependent plants, and national parks need them to sustain diverse landscapes and wildlife. Yet parks often don’t know much about their pollinators or how to protect them. In 2023 alone, 42 parks approached the National Park Service’s Inventory and Monitoring Division seeking help with pollinator research projects. Now, 19 parks are working with the division to start pollinator inventories. The division hired us as Scientists in Parks interns to test methods for two of those projects in the summer of 2023. Our work illustrates the importance of inventories—and of the Scientists in Parks program—in shaping the future of park pollinator research.

Closing the Gap

Human health is directly linked to the health of pollinators , because pollinators’ support of food crops makes it possible for people to consume nutritional diets that help them resist disease. Pollinators are also essential to the health and stability of ecosystems everywhere, including public lands. One recent study estimates that 90 percent of all flowering plant species on Earth depend on pollinators for reproduction. Many of these plants provide food, habitat, and other resources for people, livestock, and wildlife. When pollinators are abundant and diverse, their networks—the connections between them and the plants they pollinate— thrive .

We helped examine the effects of actions like mowing and grazing on pollinator networks.

Scientists attribute a 57 percent decrease in pollinators from 1998 to 2020 to pesticides , pathogens , climate change , and shifts in land use . But knowledge gaps remain in understanding how these broad threats combine with other, localized disturbances to affect pollinators. We helped examine the effects of actions like mowing and grazing on pollinator networks at Minute Man National Historical Park and Dinosaur National Monument to aid those parks in closing the gap.

Image credit: NPS / Grace Kowalski

Finding Our Passion

Along with partner organizations, the National Park Service operates the Scientists in Parks internship program to give college students, recent graduates, or early-career professionals the chance to participate in scientific research. It fosters opportunities for emerging scientists to enhance their skills in tasks like data collection, science communication, and field surveys. This unique internship program also exposes young professionals to scientific career opportunities in national parks.

In spring 2023, we were finishing our undergraduate degrees and looking for jobs. I (Kowalski) was seeking an opportunity to develop new research skills after working on ecosystem management and native seed collection as an undergraduate. My previous work fueled my determination to learn more about how land management practices can support the diversity and health of ecological communities. When I came across the job posting for a Scientists in Parks internship to study pollinators, I was excited. I thought it would provide me with the opportunity to draw on knowledge I had already developed and to learn new skills.

I felt inspired by the potential of being a part of pollinator research in national parks and being surrounded by other women in this field of study.

I (Crawford) was searching for pollinator ecology graduate programs after finding my passion for bees as an undergrad. But I struggled to find a laboratory that was a good fit. While exploring one lab website, I found a job posting for a Scientists in Parks internship related to pollinators that prioritized diversity in ecology. I felt inspired by the potential of being a part of pollinator research in national parks and being surrounded by other women in this field of study.

Laying the Groundwork

One long-term goal in inventorying pollinators at Minute Man National Historical Park in Massachusetts is to understand which mowing practices may promote the health and abundance of these animals. The specific effects of mowing depend on which pollinators are present, because different pollinators can have different nesting behavior, habitat , or breeding times . Understanding the types of pollinators that live in the park is thus crucial to determining when to mow or what mowing methods would be most beneficial. The summer 2023 field season was a pilot year for this work, in which I (Kowalski) helped establish a survey protocol, tested survey sites, and got familiar with the park’s most common pollinators. The project continues in 2024 and 2025, using the data park staff and I collected to help determine the best mowing regime.

Uncertainty about drivers of pollinator abundance exists in western parks too. There isn’t any consensus in the scientific community on whether domestic grazing is harmful to pollinator communities. But by examining the relationship between pollinators and permitted livestock grazing at Dinosaur National Monument, on the Colorado-Utah border, my (Crawford’s) research helped provide some of these much-needed data. Work in the monument is especially critical because we know species of concern, like the western bumblebee and the monarch butterfly , have existed there historically. “There has never been such a widespread inventory at the monument,” said Emily Spencer, the monument’s natural resource specialist. “The park hosts areas of high priority pollinator habitat, and it is important to have an understanding of what pollinators are present when considering planning actions and management decisions.”

Expanding Experience at Minute Man

In summer 2023, I (Kowalski) surveyed four sites throughout Minute Man weekly. During each survey, I captured live native and non-native pollinators, took photos of specimens for accurate species identification, and recorded their plant hosts. I discovered, for example, a total of nine golden northern bumble bees in two sites at Minute Man. This species has declined by as much as 50 percent since the 1950s. If this continues, researchers think it will be extinct in 70 to 80 years.

My work is helping researchers determine if the non-lethal sampling protocol is an effective way to accurately identify species like these.

Monitoring the golden northern bumble bee population at Minute Man assists scientists in tracking these trends and developing strategies—like limiting habitat disturbance—to help the population recover. My work is helping researchers determine if the non-lethal sampling protocol is an effective way to accurately identify species like these.

I also developed pollinator field guides using the photos I took, which will help park staff train other employees on species identification. And I assisted natural resources staff with habitat restoration projects like monitoring and removing invasive plants, surveying amphibians and reptiles, and measuring water quality. These activities expanded the breadth of my work experience and my understanding of ecology. By working closely with female scientists, I got to learn about their careers and how they got involved in the positions they hold today. This gave me insight and inspiration into what my future career could look like.

Growing in Science at Dinosaur

The inventory at Dinosaur National Monument aligned closely with my (Crawford's) interest in the ecological impacts of disturbance. I was excited to develop a project that would benefit pollinators and allow me to grow as a data collector and science communicator. Throughout summer 2023, I tested survey protocols, identified potential study sites, and recorded pollinators for field guides and to establish baseline data. I also conducted a comprehensive internal review of current research on the effects of domestic grazing on pollinator communities.

I learned how to balance the needs of multiple stakeholders like ranchers with the need for scientific understanding.

In writing a proposal for this project, I learned how to balance the needs of multiple stakeholders like ranchers with the need for scientific understanding. That skill will serve me well when I work on interdisciplinary projects. Learning more advanced ecological concepts related to pollination and disturbance further fueled my passion for doing research in these subject areas.

As the summer started to come to an end, I switched gears and assisted the Southwest Monarch Study , a large-scale citizen science project, in and around Dinosaur National Monument. Our goal was to understand the dynamics of the monarch population west of the Rocky Mountains, in the Uinta Basin. Understanding monarch butterflies’ migration routes can provide insight into what challenges they face during their journeys and how scientists can alleviate those challenges. For example, land managers could plant monarch food plants along the migration route to heighten the butterflies’ chances of survival.

Image credit: NPS / Nina Crawford

Our data collection focused on locations with abundant and diverse flowers, water, and trees. We used nets to capture butterflies and recorded their location, condition, sex, and behavior. We then carefully applied adhesive tags with unique identification numbers to their wings. We also swabbed their thorax—the midsection between the head and abdomen—to detect the Ophryocystis elektroscirrha parasite , which can greatly weaken a butterfly and impair its ability to reproduce. Finally, we released them, hoping they would be recaptured by other scientists or citizen science volunteers. When people report tagged butterflies to the study, scientists can draw a migration path for them , which is crucial for understanding their overwintering sites.

Making a Difference

I (Kowalski) learned about pollinator research for the first time through this experience, and it inspired me to continue working on research projects that address environmental challenges and promote conservation. In summer 2024, I’ll be working for Colorado State University on a project focused on monitoring and assessing the health and use of riparian and wetland resources on public lands throughout Colorado and Wyoming. I’m excited to continue my focus on researching and maintaining the health and stability of natural resources.

The time I (Crawford) spent as a Scientist in Parks intern and assisting the Southwest Monarch Study inspired me to continue working on pollinator inventory projects in a PhD program at the University of Wyoming. Starting this summer, I’ll be working on park pollinator data requests in the Northern Great Plains Network that examine the impact of disturbance. My experience in the Scientists in Parks program not only connected me with this project, it gave me the confidence to pursue a graduate degree. It fueled my passion for pollinator research and confirmed that I’m capable of making a difference in this field of study.

As women in science, it was inspiring to enter the National Park Service and be surrounded by other accomplished women. Being mentored by women who held positions of importance allowed us to feel represented in the scientific field and visualize ourselves in similar careers. Through connecting with park visitors and citizen scientists, we were able to pay it forward, mentoring young women ourselves to bolster a scientific community where women have a seat at the table.

This rewarding experience gave us a valuable, career-advancing opportunity to help preserve the intricate plant-pollinator networks.

Pollinators directly contribute to plant reproduction and help maintain the diversity and abundance of plant communities. But without knowing more about their pollinators, parks can do little to preserve them. That’s why inventories are so important. Our work through the Scientists in Parks program helped Dinosaur National Monument and Minute Man National Historical Park determine which methods to use in their 2024 pollinator inventories. This rewarding experience gave us a valuable, career-advancing opportunity to help preserve the intricate plant-pollinator networks on which these beloved park landscapes depend.

You Might Also Like

• dinosaur national monument
• minute man national historical park
• butterflies
• monarch butterflies
• inventories
• scientists in parks
• grace kowalski
• nina crawford
• pollinators
• young scientist
• perspectives
• park science magazine
• park science journal
• inventory and monitoring division
• species inventory

Dinosaur National Monument , Minute Man National Historical Park

Last updated: September 3, 2024

Ohio State nav bar

The Ohio State University

• BuckeyeLink
• Find People
• Search Ohio State

Academic Research and the Expert-Novice Gap: Helping Students Understand the Purpose of Research (Virtual Event)

October 3, 2024 12:00 PM - 1:00 PM Save to Calendar

Experienced researchers tend to think about research as an ongoing and iterative process in which individual researchers contribute their findings to an ongoing conversation within or across disciplines. However, as novice researchers, students may have a very different understanding of the purpose of research. The lack of a shared understanding of the goals and process of research may contribute to the frustration that students and instructors often have related to student performance on research or inquiry-based assignments.

This free virtual workshop will explore the expert-novice gap in relation to the purpose and process of academic research. Participants will learn strategies and activities that they can use to help students develop their understanding of the purpose and process of research.

For those affiliated with Ohio State, this workshop counts as credit toward the  Teaching Information Literacy endorsement  from the Drake Institute for Teaching and Learning.

This virtual program will include automated captioning. If you require an accommodation such as live captioning or interpretation to participate in this event, please email  [email protected]  as soon as possible. Requests made at least one week prior to the event will generally allow us to provide seamless access, but the university will make every effort to meet requests made after this date.

Event Organizer

Kelley Common Read (2024) Callings: The Purpose and Passion of Work

• Chapter 1: Dreamers
• Chapter 2: Generations
• Chapter 3: Healers
• Chapter 4: Philosophers
• Chapter 5: Groundbreakers

Additional resources

Chat with experts who can answer your  library and research questions.

Business/SPEA Library

1315 E. 10th Street, Room 150 Bloomington, IN 47405 812.855.1957 [email protected] Business/SPEA Library

• Callings: The Purpose and passion of Work
• Author Dave Isay

Other books authored / edited by Dave Isay

• Next: Chapter 1: Dreamers >>
• Last Updated: Sep 3, 2024 6:23 PM
• URL: https://guides.libraries.indiana.edu/callings

Social media

• Instagram for Herman B Wells Library
• Facebook for IU Libraries

Featured Databases

• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) OneSearch@IU
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Academic Search (EBSCO)
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) ERIC (EBSCO)
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Nexis Uni
• Resource available without restriction HathiTrust Digital Library
• Databases A-Z
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Google Scholar
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) JSTOR
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Web of Science
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Scopus
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) WorldCat

IU Libraries

• Diversity Resources
• About IU Libraries
• Alumni & Friends
• Departments & Staff
• Jobs & Libraries HR
• Intranet (Staff)
• IUL site admin

Frequently asked questions

What’s the difference between research aims and objectives.

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

Frequently asked questions: Writing a research paper

A research project is an academic, scientific, or professional undertaking to answer a research question . Research projects can take many forms, such as qualitative or quantitative , descriptive , longitudinal , experimental , or correlational . What kind of research approach you choose will depend on your topic.

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

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

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

• Researchability
• Feasibility and specificity
• Relevance and originality

Research questions anchor your whole project, so it’s important to spend some time refining them.

In general, they should be:

• Focused and researchable
• Answerable using credible sources
• Complex and arguable
• Feasible and specific
• Relevant and original

All research questions should be:

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

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

Your research objectives indicate how you’ll try to address your research problem and should be specific:

Research objectives describe what you intend your research project to accomplish.

They summarize the approach and purpose of the project and help to focus your research.

Your objectives should appear in the introduction of your research paper , at the end of your problem statement .

The main guidelines for formatting a paper in Chicago style are to:

• Use a standard font like 12 pt Times New Roman
• Use 1 inch margins or larger
• Apply double line spacing
• Indent every new paragraph ½ inch
• Include a title page
• Place page numbers in the top right or bottom center
• Cite your sources with author-date citations or Chicago footnotes
• Include a bibliography or reference list

To automatically generate accurate Chicago references, you can use Scribbr’s free Chicago reference generator .

The main guidelines for formatting a paper in MLA style are as follows:

• Use an easily readable font like 12 pt Times New Roman
• Set 1 inch page margins
• Include a four-line MLA heading on the first page
• Center the paper’s title
• Use title case capitalization for headings
• Cite your sources with MLA in-text citations
• List all sources cited on a Works Cited page at the end

To format a paper in APA Style , follow these guidelines:

• Use a standard font like 12 pt Times New Roman or 11 pt Arial
• If submitting for publication, insert a running head on every page
• Apply APA heading styles
• Cite your sources with APA in-text citations
• List all sources cited on a reference page at the end

No, it’s not appropriate to present new arguments or evidence in the conclusion . While you might be tempted to save a striking argument for last, research papers follow a more formal structure than this.

All your findings and arguments should be presented in the body of the text (more specifically in the results and discussion sections if you are following a scientific structure). The conclusion is meant to summarize and reflect on the evidence and arguments you have already presented, not introduce new ones.

The conclusion of a research paper has several key elements you should make sure to include:

• A restatement of the research problem
• A summary of your key arguments and/or findings
• A short discussion of the implications of your research

Don’t feel that you have to write the introduction first. The introduction is often one of the last parts of the research paper you’ll write, along with the conclusion.

This is because it can be easier to introduce your paper once you’ve already written the body ; you may not have the clearest idea of your arguments until you’ve written them, and things can change during the writing process .

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis —a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

The introduction of a research paper includes several key elements:

• A hook to catch the reader’s interest
• Relevant background on the topic
• Details of your research problem

and your problem statement

• A thesis statement or research question
• Sometimes an overview of the paper

Ask our team

Want to contact us directly? No problem.  We  are always here for you.

• Email [email protected]
• Start live chat
• Call +1 (510) 822-8066
• WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

• A world-class citation generator
• Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
• Innovative Citation Checker software
• Professional proofreading services
• Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more

Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:

• PhD dissertations
• Research proposals
• Personal statements
• Admission essays
• Motivation letters
• Reflection papers
• Journal articles
• Capstone projects

Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .

The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

Research Capacity Strengthening (RCS) Fellowship 2024

The Research Capacity Strengthening (RCS) Fellowship is designed to enhance research management ecosystems through bidirectional fellowships with global partners.

The RCS Fellowship opens on Monday, 2nd September, and will close on Monday, 23rd September 2024.

The RCS Fellowship is a joint initiative by Global Engagement (GE) and Research Innovation Services (RIS). It is designed to enhance research management ecosystems through bidirectional fellowships with global partners. Now in its second year, the RCS Fellowship has partnered with the University of Witwatersrand (Wits) and the University of Cape Town (UCT) in South Africa. In July 2024, UCL hosted three Fellows from Wits and UCT.  

The project was established following discussions with UCL staff and global partners, which highlighted that differences in capacities and structures within research management ecosystems can create challenges when applying for, setting up, and managing global research projects. The RCS Fellowship is designed to address these challenges by fostering mutual learning and strengthening institutional links to build robust research management systems. 

The RCS Fellowship offers an opportunity for UCL professional services staff to visit South Africa for five working days. The visit will focus on work shadowing and knowledge exchange, with an emphasis on two-way learning. During the trip, UCL Fellows will travel together to visit both Wits and UCT. The trip is fully funded by UCL's Research England ISPF Institutional Grant. 

We invite applications from UCL professional services staff who support research activity at UCL. We welcome applications in any capacity across the research pipeline. This includes roles such as facilitation, pre-award, post-award, project management, contracting, compliance, global engagement and impact. Applications are welcome from staff in central teams and VP offices, as well as departmental administrators and managers at any grade level. We particularly encourage applications from those who  support health research at the University, as this aligns closely with our oversea partners interests, and/or international research partnerships, or aspire to do so in the future. 

• To deepen the understanding of research management practices at global partner institutions. 
• To facilitate the exchange of knowledge in building robust research management systems and identify opportunities for strengthening collaboration with partner institutions. 
• To enhance research management ecosystems and global partnerships, thereby improving the delivery of impactful and equitable global research with Wits and UCT in health-related disciplines. 

Selection Criteria 

Strength of relationship : Applicants should demonstrate the strength of an existing relationship or the potential to develop a new relationship with Wits and UCT. A rationale and plan for how the partnership could evolve into a sustainable collaboration are both encouraged. 

Personal and professional development : Submissions should highlight how this opportunity helps applicants achieve personal and professional goals.  

Long-term impact : Applications should highlight the potential for future collaboration and bidirectional capacity building. Proposals in relation to funding that would facilitate or accelerate an ongoing opportunity are particularly welcome. 

Engagement plan : Applicants are required to suggest specific teams or departments they wish to meet at Wits and UCT during the RCS Fellowship. 

Activities and Outputs 

Engagement in meetings and discussions : UCL Fellows will actively participate in targeted meetings and discussions with a focus on matching mutual experience and expertise to relevant topics and sessions. 

Job shadowing opportunities : UCL Fellows will have the chance to shadow professionals whose roles align with their career goals. 

Written report : Upon completion of the programme, each UCL Fellow will be required to submit a written report, covering key learnings, observations, and suggestions for future collaboration or improvements. 

Value and duration 

The fellowship will cover the costs of return flights, visas, local flights, accommodation, and subsistence. 

Fellows are expected to travel to South Africa during the week of 18 November 2024. 

Pre-departure briefings and ongoing support will be provided. 

Eligibility 

Open to professional services staff who support health related research with global partners. 

Applicable to Job Grades 6-10. 

Approval from your line manager is mandatory, as the fellowship will require a week away from regular responsibilities. 

Applicants must be available to travel during the week of 18 November 2024. 

Assessment 

Proposals will be assessed by a selection panel from GE and RIS. 

Find out more and ask any questions to previous UCL Fellows at our webinar on Tuesday 10 September by following the link here.  

If you have any queries, please contact

Mustafa Sakr  Global Engagement Manager   Email: [email protected] 

Annie Brown  Global Engagement Officer   Email: [email protected]   

For the latest news about UCL’s international activity, partnerships and opportunities, subscribe to our mailing list . 

To be the first to hear about GE's latest funding calls, sign up to our mailing list .

Funding from ucl rige.

GE's funding streams are part of UCL Research, Innovation & Global Engagement (RIGE)'s wider funding calls. Find out more about the other funding calls under UCL RIGE here .

• Academy of Management Annals
• Academy of Management Collections
• Academy of Management Discoveries
• Academy of Management Journal
• AMLE Teaching Resources
• Academy of Management Perspectives
• Academy of Management Review
• About AOM Insights
• Academy of Management Proceedings
• Academy of Management Global Proceedings
• Dynamic Editions
• Past Editorial Teams
• Most Read and Cited 2023
• Most Read and Cited 2022
• Permissions
• Subscriptions and Library Information
• Terms and Conditions of Use
• AOM Artificial Intelligence Policy
• Submitting to Annals
• Submitting to Collections
• AMD Discoveries-through-Prose
• AMD Registered Reports
• Submitting to AMJ
• Submitting to AMLE
• Submitting to AMP
• Submitting to AMR
• Submissions
• Ethics of Research and Publishing Video Series
• From the Editors: Publishing in AOM Journals
• Style Guide for Authors
• Accepted Author Toolkit
• Calls for Editors
• Reviewer Resources
• Open Access
• AOM-CARMA Program
• 2024 Annual Meeting Program Awards
• 2023 Annual Meeting Program Awards
• 2022 Annual Meeting Program Awards
• 2021 Annual Meeting Program Awards
• 2020 Annual Meeting Program Awards
• 2019 Annual Meeting Program Awards
• 2018 Annual Meeting Program Awards
• 2017 Annual Meeting Program Awards
• 2024 Career Achievement Awards
• 2023 Career Achievement Awards
• 2022 Career Achievement Awards
• 2021 Career Achievement Awards
• 2020 Career Achievement Awards
• 2019 Career Achievement Awards
• 2018 Career Achievement Awards
• 2017 Career Achievement Awards
• 2016 Career Achievement Awards
• 2022 Division and Interest Group Awards
• 2021 Division and Interest Group Awards
• 2020 Division and Interest Group Awards
• 2019 Division and Interest Group Awards
• 2018 Division and Interest Group Awards
• 2017 Division and Interest Group Awards
• 2016 Division and Interest Group Awards
• 2024 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2023 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2022 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2021 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2020 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2019 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2018 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2017 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2016 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2015 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2014 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2013 George R. Terry Book Award
• 2024 Publication Awards
• 2023 Publication Awards
• 2022 Publication Awards
• 2021 Publication Awards
• 2020 Publication Awards
• 2019 Publication Awards
• 2018 Publication Awards
• 2017 Publication Awards
• Connect@AOM
• Directories
• DIG Elections
• DIG Nominations
• Social Media
• Volunteering
• Fellows Group
• PhD Project
• Annual Meeting Theme
• Professional Development Workshops
• Symposia and Paper Sessions
• Annual Meeting Proceedings
• Event Volunteers and Contacts
• Exhibit Hall Info
• Exhibitor Information
• Future Annual Meetings
• 2024: Innovating for the Future - Policy, Purpose, and Organizations
• 2023: Putting the Worker Front and Center
• 2022: Creating a Better World Together
• 2021: Bringing the Manager Back in Management
• 2020: Broadening our Sight
• 2019: Understanding the Inclusive Organization
• 2018: Improving Lives
• 2017: At The Interface
• 2016: Making Organizations Meaningful
• 2015: Opening Governance
• Session Moderators in Paper Sessions
• Meeting Room and Audiovisual Setup
• Speaker Ready Rooms
• On-site Health & Safety Information
• First Time Attendees
• Hotel Accommodations
• On-site Registration and Check In
• Visa Information
• Sustainability
• Why Attend?
• Reviewer Guidelines
• Submission Process
• Submission Guidelines
• Submission Policies and Ethics
• TLC Call for Submissions
• Paper Development Workshops
• Israel: Start-Up to Scale-Up Conference
• England: Big Data Conference
• Africa Conference
• Mexico: Advancing Management Research in Latin America
• Slovenia: Responsible Leadership Conference
• Career Services Video Library
• Annual Meeting Career Fair
• Editorial Guidelines
• Design Guidelines
• Historical Timeline
• Terms of Use
• Academy News
• Division and Interest Group Newsletters
• Insights Newsletter
• Press Resources
• AOM Scholars On...
• Member Spotlights
• Code of Ethics
• Policies and Procedures for Handling Ethical Complaints
• Statement of Standards Regarding Sexual Harassment
• Board of Governors Elections
• Committees and Task Forces
• Presidential Gallery
• President's Corner
• Board of Governors Elections Results
• 2022 Annual Report President's Address
• 2022 Annual Report Goal One
• 2022 Annual Report Goal Two
• 2022 Annual Report Goal Three
• 2022 Annual Report Goal Four
• 2022 Annual Report Leadership
• 2022 Annual Report Recognition
• 2022 Annual Report Finances
• Articles of Incorporation
• Strategic Plan
• AOM Governance Policies
• Introductory Guide to AOM and the Annual Meeting
• Annals | AMD | AMJ | AMLE | AMP | AMR
• Insights | Proceedings | Collections
• Issues and Articles
• Subscriptions | Permissions
• Resources: Author | Editor | Reviewer
• Divisions and Interest Groups (DIGs)
• Affiliated and Associated Societies
• Registering and Attending
• Teaching and Learning Conference
• Specialized Conferences
• Awards and Recognition
• Membership Dues Assistance Program
• Annual Report | Strategic Plan
• AOM News | Newsletters
• Subject Matter Experts

Career Services

• Job Seekers

The Reviewer Center for the 2024 Annual Meeting in Chicago is open.

The aom 2024 deadline for submissions has passed. to access your submissions please visit the submission center ., aom 2024 theme, 84 th annual meeting of the academy of management (aom 2024) 9-13 august 2024  | chicago, il, usa.

Vice President and Program Chair : Tammy L. Madsen, Santa Clara University

Innovating for the Future  invites members to examine the interplay of innovation, policy, and purpose as a lens for rethinking conventional ways of leading, managing, and organizing.

The future state of the organization is of perennial concern to management scholars and managers themselves. Political unrest, economic volatility, inequality, rapid technological change, environmental erosion, health crises, and pronounced societal issues across the globe continue to challenge traditional approaches to governing the organization.

What are the implications for the organization of the future? The unprecedented complexity underscores the importance of innovation and policy-making (at macro, meta, and micro levels) in shaping organizations in pursuit of sustainable growth. Developing novel managerial and organizational purpose driven solutions to address this complexity requires collaboration and co-innovation with and among multiple stakeholders. Yet, orchestrating an evolving and diverse set of independent actors to solve untamed problems requires working in unfamiliar ways. Empirical research also reveals the tradeoffs and difficulties organizations encounter when responding to the multi-faceted, concurrent challenges.

In today’s world, the intricacies of effectively leading and managing an organization demand a fresh perspective. And who better to continue to lead the charge than management scholars. We are uniquely positioned to question the status quo and reimagine how value is orchestrated, created, and distributed with and among diverse and loosely connected stakeholders. An example of a challenge at the intersection of multiple stakeholders is the nature and accelerated pace of digital technology development and adoption. ChatGPT had 1 million users within 5 days of its first release and reached 100M users in its first 2 months, faster than TikTok or Instagram. However, seven countries were quick to ban the product over concerns about privacy or the spread of misinformation and a large number of tech luminaries have signed an  open letter  that calls for pausing the development and testing of AI technologies. In a step to encourage responsible practices, the leading tech firms developing AI have committed to a set of basic safeguards for the fast-moving technology. Meanwhile, hundreds of artificial intelligence apps have emerged with promises to enhance automation, performance management, worker creativity and productivity; and workers, managers, and organizational leaders seek guidance on how AI will change the nature of work.

Such dramatic technological shifts coupled with amplifying environmental and public concerns serve as the backdrop for the 2024 theme. Instead of focusing on organizational reactions to the ever-changing complexities of our world, Innovating for the Future urges scholars to delve deep within organizations. By reimagining the organization from the inside out and considering the interplay of innovation, policy, and purpose, the theme seeks to unlock a wave of innovative insights and evidence-based contributions that pave the way for a brighter future for workers, managers, organizations, and society at large. Several questions emerge*:

• What is the relationship between policy, purpose, and innovation in organizations and how does it affect value creation and distribution?
• What organizational processes enable (constrain) decision making that integrates all three elements?
• What innovations in organizational policies, processes, and practices can help employees and managers cope with intractable problems while staying true to their purpose?
• How might managers navigate the tensions that arise between their internal sense of purpose and the expectations of external stakeholders?
• What innovations in organizational forms, systems, and micro-processes can help leaders, managers and workers embed concerns about societal issues in day-to-day activities for enduring impact?
• How might organizations and managers create policies (at macro, meta, and micro levels) that strike a balance between regulating the use of emerging technologies and incentivizing innovation that aligns with responsible, purpose-oriented growth?
• Under what conditions will government intervention, such as regulation or deregulation, help or hinder an organization’s ability to mobilize collective action aimed at addressing complex grand challenges? How might regulatory heterogeneity and institutional conflicts across and within countries affect the pace of solution development?
• What can leaders do to ensure that governing policies related to the use of emerging technologies and the organizational practices associated with their implementation promote inclusion rather than exacerbate inequalities?
• What actions might leaders take to infuse a responsible business mindset into an organization’s culture, practices, policy-making, and innovation activities?
• In what ways can managers and loosely connected stakeholders align incentives and cultivate productive relational arrangements to ensure that co-innovated solutions are developed and utilized in a manner that remains true to purpose-driven objectives?
• How might organizations leverage advancements in digital technology to shape stakeholder interactions and to rethink their value creation and distribution processes?

* Interested in discovering research questions tailored to each Division and Interest Group (DIG)? Explore the Theme-related Research Questions offered by the Program Chairs and PDW Chairs of each DIG.

Innovating for the future beckons scholars to broaden their thinking and creativity about what needs to change within organizations to address the persistent problems and opportunities of our time. The unparalleled level of complexity in today’s environment provides an opportunity for us, AOM’s ecosystem of scholars, educators and practitioners, to come together to make a compelling difference.

AOM Submission Center

AOM Reviewer Center

84 th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management (AOM 2024)

9-13 August 2024 Chicago, IL, USA

AOM 2024 Program

Annual Meeting FAQs/Support

AOM 2024 Key Dates

• Registration/Housing Open : 5 March 2024
• Decision Notifications : Late March 2024
• Annual Meeting Program Available June 2024
• Early Registration Rate Deadline : 7 May 2024
• Regular Registration Rate Deadline : 16 July 2024
• Late Registration Rates :  17 July-13 August 2024
• Hotel Reservations Deadline : 17 July 2024
• 84th Annual Meeting : In-person 9-13 August 2024 Chicago, IL, USA
• TLC@AOM In-person @AOM 2024 11 August 2024

• Privacy Policy
• FAQ/Support