sample research report writing

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and Types

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and Types

Table of Contents

Research Report

Definition:

Research Report is a written document that presents the results of a research project or study, including the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions, in a clear and objective manner.

The purpose of a research report is to communicate the findings of the research to the intended audience, which could be other researchers, stakeholders, or the general public.

Components of Research Report

Components of Research Report are as follows:

Introduction

The introduction sets the stage for the research report and provides a brief overview of the research question or problem being investigated. It should include a clear statement of the purpose of the study and its significance or relevance to the field of research. It may also provide background information or a literature review to help contextualize the research.

Literature Review

The literature review provides a critical analysis and synthesis of the existing research and scholarship relevant to the research question or problem. It should identify the gaps, inconsistencies, and contradictions in the literature and show how the current study addresses these issues. The literature review also establishes the theoretical framework or conceptual model that guides the research.

Methodology

The methodology section describes the research design, methods, and procedures used to collect and analyze data. It should include information on the sample or participants, data collection instruments, data collection procedures, and data analysis techniques. The methodology should be clear and detailed enough to allow other researchers to replicate the study.

The results section presents the findings of the study in a clear and objective manner. It should provide a detailed description of the data and statistics used to answer the research question or test the hypothesis. Tables, graphs, and figures may be included to help visualize the data and illustrate the key findings.

The discussion section interprets the results of the study and explains their significance or relevance to the research question or problem. It should also compare the current findings with those of previous studies and identify the implications for future research or practice. The discussion should be based on the results presented in the previous section and should avoid speculation or unfounded conclusions.

The conclusion summarizes the key findings of the study and restates the main argument or thesis presented in the introduction. It should also provide a brief overview of the contributions of the study to the field of research and the implications for practice or policy.

The references section lists all the sources cited in the research report, following a specific citation style, such as APA or MLA.

The appendices section includes any additional material, such as data tables, figures, or instruments used in the study, that could not be included in the main text due to space limitations.

Types of Research Report

Types of Research Report are as follows:

Thesis is a type of research report. A thesis is a long-form research document that presents the findings and conclusions of an original research study conducted by a student as part of a graduate or postgraduate program. It is typically written by a student pursuing a higher degree, such as a Master’s or Doctoral degree, although it can also be written by researchers or scholars in other fields.

Research Paper

Research paper is a type of research report. A research paper is a document that presents the results of a research study or investigation. Research papers can be written in a variety of fields, including science, social science, humanities, and business. They typically follow a standard format that includes an introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion sections.

Technical Report

A technical report is a detailed report that provides information about a specific technical or scientific problem or project. Technical reports are often used in engineering, science, and other technical fields to document research and development work.

Progress Report

A progress report provides an update on the progress of a research project or program over a specific period of time. Progress reports are typically used to communicate the status of a project to stakeholders, funders, or project managers.

Feasibility Report

A feasibility report assesses the feasibility of a proposed project or plan, providing an analysis of the potential risks, benefits, and costs associated with the project. Feasibility reports are often used in business, engineering, and other fields to determine the viability of a project before it is undertaken.

Field Report

A field report documents observations and findings from fieldwork, which is research conducted in the natural environment or setting. Field reports are often used in anthropology, ecology, and other social and natural sciences.

Experimental Report

An experimental report documents the results of a scientific experiment, including the hypothesis, methods, results, and conclusions. Experimental reports are often used in biology, chemistry, and other sciences to communicate the results of laboratory experiments.

Case Study Report

A case study report provides an in-depth analysis of a specific case or situation, often used in psychology, social work, and other fields to document and understand complex cases or phenomena.

Literature Review Report

A literature review report synthesizes and summarizes existing research on a specific topic, providing an overview of the current state of knowledge on the subject. Literature review reports are often used in social sciences, education, and other fields to identify gaps in the literature and guide future research.

Research Report Example

Following is a Research Report Example sample for Students:

Title: The Impact of Social Media on Academic Performance among High School Students

This study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and academic performance among high school students. The study utilized a quantitative research design, which involved a survey questionnaire administered to a sample of 200 high school students. The findings indicate that there is a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance, suggesting that excessive social media use can lead to poor academic performance among high school students. The results of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers, as they highlight the need for strategies that can help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities.

Introduction:

Social media has become an integral part of the lives of high school students. With the widespread use of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, students can connect with friends, share photos and videos, and engage in discussions on a range of topics. While social media offers many benefits, concerns have been raised about its impact on academic performance. Many studies have found a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance among high school students (Kirschner & Karpinski, 2010; Paul, Baker, & Cochran, 2012).

Given the growing importance of social media in the lives of high school students, it is important to investigate its impact on academic performance. This study aims to address this gap by examining the relationship between social media use and academic performance among high school students.

Methodology:

The study utilized a quantitative research design, which involved a survey questionnaire administered to a sample of 200 high school students. The questionnaire was developed based on previous studies and was designed to measure the frequency and duration of social media use, as well as academic performance.

The participants were selected using a convenience sampling technique, and the survey questionnaire was distributed in the classroom during regular school hours. The data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.

The findings indicate that the majority of high school students use social media platforms on a daily basis, with Facebook being the most popular platform. The results also show a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance, suggesting that excessive social media use can lead to poor academic performance among high school students.

Discussion:

The results of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers. The negative correlation between social media use and academic performance suggests that strategies should be put in place to help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities. For example, educators could incorporate social media into their teaching strategies to engage students and enhance learning. Parents could limit their children’s social media use and encourage them to prioritize their academic responsibilities. Policymakers could develop guidelines and policies to regulate social media use among high school students.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, this study provides evidence of the negative impact of social media on academic performance among high school students. The findings highlight the need for strategies that can help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities. Further research is needed to explore the specific mechanisms by which social media use affects academic performance and to develop effective strategies for addressing this issue.

Limitations:

One limitation of this study is the use of convenience sampling, which limits the generalizability of the findings to other populations. Future studies should use random sampling techniques to increase the representativeness of the sample. Another limitation is the use of self-reported measures, which may be subject to social desirability bias. Future studies could use objective measures of social media use and academic performance, such as tracking software and school records.

Implications:

The findings of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers. Educators could incorporate social media into their teaching strategies to engage students and enhance learning. For example, teachers could use social media platforms to share relevant educational resources and facilitate online discussions. Parents could limit their children’s social media use and encourage them to prioritize their academic responsibilities. They could also engage in open communication with their children to understand their social media use and its impact on their academic performance. Policymakers could develop guidelines and policies to regulate social media use among high school students. For example, schools could implement social media policies that restrict access during class time and encourage responsible use.

References:

• Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook® and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1237-1245.
• Paul, J. A., Baker, H. M., & Cochran, J. D. (2012). Effect of online social networking on student academic performance. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 8(1), 1-19.
• Pantic, I. (2014). Online social networking and mental health. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(10), 652-657.
• Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948-958.

Note*: Above mention, Example is just a sample for the students’ guide. Do not directly copy and paste as your College or University assignment. Kindly do some research and Write your own.

Applications of Research Report

Research reports have many applications, including:

• Communicating research findings: The primary application of a research report is to communicate the results of a study to other researchers, stakeholders, or the general public. The report serves as a way to share new knowledge, insights, and discoveries with others in the field.
• Informing policy and practice : Research reports can inform policy and practice by providing evidence-based recommendations for decision-makers. For example, a research report on the effectiveness of a new drug could inform regulatory agencies in their decision-making process.
• Supporting further research: Research reports can provide a foundation for further research in a particular area. Other researchers may use the findings and methodology of a report to develop new research questions or to build on existing research.
• Evaluating programs and interventions : Research reports can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and interventions in achieving their intended outcomes. For example, a research report on a new educational program could provide evidence of its impact on student performance.
• Demonstrating impact : Research reports can be used to demonstrate the impact of research funding or to evaluate the success of research projects. By presenting the findings and outcomes of a study, research reports can show the value of research to funders and stakeholders.
• Enhancing professional development : Research reports can be used to enhance professional development by providing a source of information and learning for researchers and practitioners in a particular field. For example, a research report on a new teaching methodology could provide insights and ideas for educators to incorporate into their own practice.

How to write Research Report

Here are some steps you can follow to write a research report:

• Identify the research question: The first step in writing a research report is to identify your research question. This will help you focus your research and organize your findings.
• Conduct research : Once you have identified your research question, you will need to conduct research to gather relevant data and information. This can involve conducting experiments, reviewing literature, or analyzing data.
• Organize your findings: Once you have gathered all of your data, you will need to organize your findings in a way that is clear and understandable. This can involve creating tables, graphs, or charts to illustrate your results.
• Write the report: Once you have organized your findings, you can begin writing the report. Start with an introduction that provides background information and explains the purpose of your research. Next, provide a detailed description of your research methods and findings. Finally, summarize your results and draw conclusions based on your findings.
• Proofread and edit: After you have written your report, be sure to proofread and edit it carefully. Check for grammar and spelling errors, and make sure that your report is well-organized and easy to read.
• Include a reference list: Be sure to include a list of references that you used in your research. This will give credit to your sources and allow readers to further explore the topic if they choose.
• Format your report: Finally, format your report according to the guidelines provided by your instructor or organization. This may include formatting requirements for headings, margins, fonts, and spacing.

Purpose of Research Report

The purpose of a research report is to communicate the results of a research study to a specific audience, such as peers in the same field, stakeholders, or the general public. The report provides a detailed description of the research methods, findings, and conclusions.

Some common purposes of a research report include:

• Sharing knowledge: A research report allows researchers to share their findings and knowledge with others in their field. This helps to advance the field and improve the understanding of a particular topic.
• Identifying trends: A research report can identify trends and patterns in data, which can help guide future research and inform decision-making.
• Addressing problems: A research report can provide insights into problems or issues and suggest solutions or recommendations for addressing them.
• Evaluating programs or interventions : A research report can evaluate the effectiveness of programs or interventions, which can inform decision-making about whether to continue, modify, or discontinue them.
• Meeting regulatory requirements: In some fields, research reports are required to meet regulatory requirements, such as in the case of drug trials or environmental impact studies.

When to Write Research Report

A research report should be written after completing the research study. This includes collecting data, analyzing the results, and drawing conclusions based on the findings. Once the research is complete, the report should be written in a timely manner while the information is still fresh in the researcher’s mind.

In academic settings, research reports are often required as part of coursework or as part of a thesis or dissertation. In this case, the report should be written according to the guidelines provided by the instructor or institution.

In other settings, such as in industry or government, research reports may be required to inform decision-making or to comply with regulatory requirements. In these cases, the report should be written as soon as possible after the research is completed in order to inform decision-making in a timely manner.

Overall, the timing of when to write a research report depends on the purpose of the research, the expectations of the audience, and any regulatory requirements that need to be met. However, it is important to complete the report in a timely manner while the information is still fresh in the researcher’s mind.

Characteristics of Research Report

There are several characteristics of a research report that distinguish it from other types of writing. These characteristics include:

• Objective: A research report should be written in an objective and unbiased manner. It should present the facts and findings of the research study without any personal opinions or biases.
• Systematic: A research report should be written in a systematic manner. It should follow a clear and logical structure, and the information should be presented in a way that is easy to understand and follow.
• Detailed: A research report should be detailed and comprehensive. It should provide a thorough description of the research methods, results, and conclusions.
• Accurate : A research report should be accurate and based on sound research methods. The findings and conclusions should be supported by data and evidence.
• Organized: A research report should be well-organized. It should include headings and subheadings to help the reader navigate the report and understand the main points.
• Clear and concise: A research report should be written in clear and concise language. The information should be presented in a way that is easy to understand, and unnecessary jargon should be avoided.
• Citations and references: A research report should include citations and references to support the findings and conclusions. This helps to give credit to other researchers and to provide readers with the opportunity to further explore the topic.

Advantages of Research Report

Research reports have several advantages, including:

• Communicating research findings: Research reports allow researchers to communicate their findings to a wider audience, including other researchers, stakeholders, and the general public. This helps to disseminate knowledge and advance the understanding of a particular topic.
• Providing evidence for decision-making : Research reports can provide evidence to inform decision-making, such as in the case of policy-making, program planning, or product development. The findings and conclusions can help guide decisions and improve outcomes.
• Supporting further research: Research reports can provide a foundation for further research on a particular topic. Other researchers can build on the findings and conclusions of the report, which can lead to further discoveries and advancements in the field.
• Demonstrating expertise: Research reports can demonstrate the expertise of the researchers and their ability to conduct rigorous and high-quality research. This can be important for securing funding, promotions, and other professional opportunities.
• Meeting regulatory requirements: In some fields, research reports are required to meet regulatory requirements, such as in the case of drug trials or environmental impact studies. Producing a high-quality research report can help ensure compliance with these requirements.

Limitations of Research Report

Despite their advantages, research reports also have some limitations, including:

• Time-consuming: Conducting research and writing a report can be a time-consuming process, particularly for large-scale studies. This can limit the frequency and speed of producing research reports.
• Expensive: Conducting research and producing a report can be expensive, particularly for studies that require specialized equipment, personnel, or data. This can limit the scope and feasibility of some research studies.
• Limited generalizability: Research studies often focus on a specific population or context, which can limit the generalizability of the findings to other populations or contexts.
• Potential bias : Researchers may have biases or conflicts of interest that can influence the findings and conclusions of the research study. Additionally, participants may also have biases or may not be representative of the larger population, which can limit the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Accessibility: Research reports may be written in technical or academic language, which can limit their accessibility to a wider audience. Additionally, some research may be behind paywalls or require specialized access, which can limit the ability of others to read and use the findings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 11: Presenting Your Research

Writing a Research Report in American Psychological Association (APA) Style

Learning Objectives

• Identify the major sections of an APA-style research report and the basic contents of each section.
• Plan and write an effective APA-style research report.

In this section, we look at how to write an APA-style empirical research report , an article that presents the results of one or more new studies. Recall that the standard sections of an empirical research report provide a kind of outline. Here we consider each of these sections in detail, including what information it contains, how that information is formatted and organized, and tips for writing each section. At the end of this section is a sample APA-style research report that illustrates many of these principles.

Sections of a Research Report

Title page and abstract.

An APA-style research report begins with a  title page . The title is centred in the upper half of the page, with each important word capitalized. The title should clearly and concisely (in about 12 words or fewer) communicate the primary variables and research questions. This sometimes requires a main title followed by a subtitle that elaborates on the main title, in which case the main title and subtitle are separated by a colon. Here are some titles from recent issues of professional journals published by the American Psychological Association.

• Sex Differences in Coping Styles and Implications for Depressed Mood
• Effects of Aging and Divided Attention on Memory for Items and Their Contexts
• Computer-Assisted Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Child Anxiety: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial
• Virtual Driving and Risk Taking: Do Racing Games Increase Risk-Taking Cognitions, Affect, and Behaviour?

Below the title are the authors’ names and, on the next line, their institutional affiliation—the university or other institution where the authors worked when they conducted the research. As we have already seen, the authors are listed in an order that reflects their contribution to the research. When multiple authors have made equal contributions to the research, they often list their names alphabetically or in a randomly determined order.

In some areas of psychology, the titles of many empirical research reports are informal in a way that is perhaps best described as “cute.” They usually take the form of a play on words or a well-known expression that relates to the topic under study. Here are some examples from recent issues of the Journal Psychological Science .

• “Smells Like Clean Spirit: Nonconscious Effects of Scent on Cognition and Behavior”
• “Time Crawls: The Temporal Resolution of Infants’ Visual Attention”
• “Scent of a Woman: Men’s Testosterone Responses to Olfactory Ovulation Cues”
• “Apocalypse Soon?: Dire Messages Reduce Belief in Global Warming by Contradicting Just-World Beliefs”
• “Serial vs. Parallel Processing: Sometimes They Look Like Tweedledum and Tweedledee but They Can (and Should) Be Distinguished”
• “How Do I Love Thee? Let Me Count the Words: The Social Effects of Expressive Writing”

Individual researchers differ quite a bit in their preference for such titles. Some use them regularly, while others never use them. What might be some of the pros and cons of using cute article titles?

For articles that are being submitted for publication, the title page also includes an author note that lists the authors’ full institutional affiliations, any acknowledgments the authors wish to make to agencies that funded the research or to colleagues who commented on it, and contact information for the authors. For student papers that are not being submitted for publication—including theses—author notes are generally not necessary.

The  abstract  is a summary of the study. It is the second page of the manuscript and is headed with the word  Abstract . The first line is not indented. The abstract presents the research question, a summary of the method, the basic results, and the most important conclusions. Because the abstract is usually limited to about 200 words, it can be a challenge to write a good one.

Introduction

The  introduction  begins on the third page of the manuscript. The heading at the top of this page is the full title of the manuscript, with each important word capitalized as on the title page. The introduction includes three distinct subsections, although these are typically not identified by separate headings. The opening introduces the research question and explains why it is interesting, the literature review discusses relevant previous research, and the closing restates the research question and comments on the method used to answer it.

The Opening

The  opening , which is usually a paragraph or two in length, introduces the research question and explains why it is interesting. To capture the reader’s attention, researcher Daryl Bem recommends starting with general observations about the topic under study, expressed in ordinary language (not technical jargon)—observations that are about people and their behaviour (not about researchers or their research; Bem, 2003 [1] ). Concrete examples are often very useful here. According to Bem, this would be a poor way to begin a research report:

Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance received a great deal of attention during the latter part of the 20th century (p. 191)

The following would be much better:

The individual who holds two beliefs that are inconsistent with one another may feel uncomfortable. For example, the person who knows that he or she enjoys smoking but believes it to be unhealthy may experience discomfort arising from the inconsistency or disharmony between these two thoughts or cognitions. This feeling of discomfort was called cognitive dissonance by social psychologist Leon Festinger (1957), who suggested that individuals will be motivated to remove this dissonance in whatever way they can (p. 191).

After capturing the reader’s attention, the opening should go on to introduce the research question and explain why it is interesting. Will the answer fill a gap in the literature? Will it provide a test of an important theory? Does it have practical implications? Giving readers a clear sense of what the research is about and why they should care about it will motivate them to continue reading the literature review—and will help them make sense of it.

Breaking the Rules

Researcher Larry Jacoby reported several studies showing that a word that people see or hear repeatedly can seem more familiar even when they do not recall the repetitions—and that this tendency is especially pronounced among older adults. He opened his article with the following humourous anecdote:

A friend whose mother is suffering symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) tells the story of taking her mother to visit a nursing home, preliminary to her mother’s moving there. During an orientation meeting at the nursing home, the rules and regulations were explained, one of which regarded the dining room. The dining room was described as similar to a fine restaurant except that tipping was not required. The absence of tipping was a central theme in the orientation lecture, mentioned frequently to emphasize the quality of care along with the advantages of having paid in advance. At the end of the meeting, the friend’s mother was asked whether she had any questions. She replied that she only had one question: “Should I tip?” (Jacoby, 1999, p. 3)

Although both humour and personal anecdotes are generally discouraged in APA-style writing, this example is a highly effective way to start because it both engages the reader and provides an excellent real-world example of the topic under study.

The Literature Review

Immediately after the opening comes the  literature review , which describes relevant previous research on the topic and can be anywhere from several paragraphs to several pages in length. However, the literature review is not simply a list of past studies. Instead, it constitutes a kind of argument for why the research question is worth addressing. By the end of the literature review, readers should be convinced that the research question makes sense and that the present study is a logical next step in the ongoing research process.

Like any effective argument, the literature review must have some kind of structure. For example, it might begin by describing a phenomenon in a general way along with several studies that demonstrate it, then describing two or more competing theories of the phenomenon, and finally presenting a hypothesis to test one or more of the theories. Or it might describe one phenomenon, then describe another phenomenon that seems inconsistent with the first one, then propose a theory that resolves the inconsistency, and finally present a hypothesis to test that theory. In applied research, it might describe a phenomenon or theory, then describe how that phenomenon or theory applies to some important real-world situation, and finally suggest a way to test whether it does, in fact, apply to that situation.

Looking at the literature review in this way emphasizes a few things. First, it is extremely important to start with an outline of the main points that you want to make, organized in the order that you want to make them. The basic structure of your argument, then, should be apparent from the outline itself. Second, it is important to emphasize the structure of your argument in your writing. One way to do this is to begin the literature review by summarizing your argument even before you begin to make it. “In this article, I will describe two apparently contradictory phenomena, present a new theory that has the potential to resolve the apparent contradiction, and finally present a novel hypothesis to test the theory.” Another way is to open each paragraph with a sentence that summarizes the main point of the paragraph and links it to the preceding points. These opening sentences provide the “transitions” that many beginning researchers have difficulty with. Instead of beginning a paragraph by launching into a description of a previous study, such as “Williams (2004) found that…,” it is better to start by indicating something about why you are describing this particular study. Here are some simple examples:

Another example of this phenomenon comes from the work of Williams (2004).

Williams (2004) offers one explanation of this phenomenon.

An alternative perspective has been provided by Williams (2004).

We used a method based on the one used by Williams (2004).

Finally, remember that your goal is to construct an argument for why your research question is interesting and worth addressing—not necessarily why your favourite answer to it is correct. In other words, your literature review must be balanced. If you want to emphasize the generality of a phenomenon, then of course you should discuss various studies that have demonstrated it. However, if there are other studies that have failed to demonstrate it, you should discuss them too. Or if you are proposing a new theory, then of course you should discuss findings that are consistent with that theory. However, if there are other findings that are inconsistent with it, again, you should discuss them too. It is acceptable to argue that the  balance  of the research supports the existence of a phenomenon or is consistent with a theory (and that is usually the best that researchers in psychology can hope for), but it is not acceptable to  ignore contradictory evidence. Besides, a large part of what makes a research question interesting is uncertainty about its answer.

The Closing

The  closing  of the introduction—typically the final paragraph or two—usually includes two important elements. The first is a clear statement of the main research question or hypothesis. This statement tends to be more formal and precise than in the opening and is often expressed in terms of operational definitions of the key variables. The second is a brief overview of the method and some comment on its appropriateness. Here, for example, is how Darley and Latané (1968) [2] concluded the introduction to their classic article on the bystander effect:

These considerations lead to the hypothesis that the more bystanders to an emergency, the less likely, or the more slowly, any one bystander will intervene to provide aid. To test this proposition it would be necessary to create a situation in which a realistic “emergency” could plausibly occur. Each subject should also be blocked from communicating with others to prevent his getting information about their behaviour during the emergency. Finally, the experimental situation should allow for the assessment of the speed and frequency of the subjects’ reaction to the emergency. The experiment reported below attempted to fulfill these conditions. (p. 378)

Thus the introduction leads smoothly into the next major section of the article—the method section.

The  method section  is where you describe how you conducted your study. An important principle for writing a method section is that it should be clear and detailed enough that other researchers could replicate the study by following your “recipe.” This means that it must describe all the important elements of the study—basic demographic characteristics of the participants, how they were recruited, whether they were randomly assigned, how the variables were manipulated or measured, how counterbalancing was accomplished, and so on. At the same time, it should avoid irrelevant details such as the fact that the study was conducted in Classroom 37B of the Industrial Technology Building or that the questionnaire was double-sided and completed using pencils.

The method section begins immediately after the introduction ends with the heading “Method” (not “Methods”) centred on the page. Immediately after this is the subheading “Participants,” left justified and in italics. The participants subsection indicates how many participants there were, the number of women and men, some indication of their age, other demographics that may be relevant to the study, and how they were recruited, including any incentives given for participation.

After the participants section, the structure can vary a bit. Figure 11.1 shows three common approaches. In the first, the participants section is followed by a design and procedure subsection, which describes the rest of the method. This works well for methods that are relatively simple and can be described adequately in a few paragraphs. In the second approach, the participants section is followed by separate design and procedure subsections. This works well when both the design and the procedure are relatively complicated and each requires multiple paragraphs.

What is the difference between design and procedure? The design of a study is its overall structure. What were the independent and dependent variables? Was the independent variable manipulated, and if so, was it manipulated between or within subjects? How were the variables operationally defined? The procedure is how the study was carried out. It often works well to describe the procedure in terms of what the participants did rather than what the researchers did. For example, the participants gave their informed consent, read a set of instructions, completed a block of four practice trials, completed a block of 20 test trials, completed two questionnaires, and were debriefed and excused.

In the third basic way to organize a method section, the participants subsection is followed by a materials subsection before the design and procedure subsections. This works well when there are complicated materials to describe. This might mean multiple questionnaires, written vignettes that participants read and respond to, perceptual stimuli, and so on. The heading of this subsection can be modified to reflect its content. Instead of “Materials,” it can be “Questionnaires,” “Stimuli,” and so on.

The  results section  is where you present the main results of the study, including the results of the statistical analyses. Although it does not include the raw data—individual participants’ responses or scores—researchers should save their raw data and make them available to other researchers who request them. Several journals now encourage the open sharing of raw data online.

Although there are no standard subsections, it is still important for the results section to be logically organized. Typically it begins with certain preliminary issues. One is whether any participants or responses were excluded from the analyses and why. The rationale for excluding data should be described clearly so that other researchers can decide whether it is appropriate. A second preliminary issue is how multiple responses were combined to produce the primary variables in the analyses. For example, if participants rated the attractiveness of 20 stimulus people, you might have to explain that you began by computing the mean attractiveness rating for each participant. Or if they recalled as many items as they could from study list of 20 words, did you count the number correctly recalled, compute the percentage correctly recalled, or perhaps compute the number correct minus the number incorrect? A third preliminary issue is the reliability of the measures. This is where you would present test-retest correlations, Cronbach’s α, or other statistics to show that the measures are consistent across time and across items. A final preliminary issue is whether the manipulation was successful. This is where you would report the results of any manipulation checks.

The results section should then tackle the primary research questions, one at a time. Again, there should be a clear organization. One approach would be to answer the most general questions and then proceed to answer more specific ones. Another would be to answer the main question first and then to answer secondary ones. Regardless, Bem (2003) [3] suggests the following basic structure for discussing each new result:

• Remind the reader of the research question.
• Give the answer to the research question in words.
• Present the relevant statistics.
• Qualify the answer if necessary.
• Summarize the result.

Notice that only Step 3 necessarily involves numbers. The rest of the steps involve presenting the research question and the answer to it in words. In fact, the basic results should be clear even to a reader who skips over the numbers.

The  discussion  is the last major section of the research report. Discussions usually consist of some combination of the following elements:

• Summary of the research
• Theoretical implications
• Practical implications
• Limitations
• Suggestions for future research

The discussion typically begins with a summary of the study that provides a clear answer to the research question. In a short report with a single study, this might require no more than a sentence. In a longer report with multiple studies, it might require a paragraph or even two. The summary is often followed by a discussion of the theoretical implications of the research. Do the results provide support for any existing theories? If not, how  can  they be explained? Although you do not have to provide a definitive explanation or detailed theory for your results, you at least need to outline one or more possible explanations. In applied research—and often in basic research—there is also some discussion of the practical implications of the research. How can the results be used, and by whom, to accomplish some real-world goal?

The theoretical and practical implications are often followed by a discussion of the study’s limitations. Perhaps there are problems with its internal or external validity. Perhaps the manipulation was not very effective or the measures not very reliable. Perhaps there is some evidence that participants did not fully understand their task or that they were suspicious of the intent of the researchers. Now is the time to discuss these issues and how they might have affected the results. But do not overdo it. All studies have limitations, and most readers will understand that a different sample or different measures might have produced different results. Unless there is good reason to think they  would have, however, there is no reason to mention these routine issues. Instead, pick two or three limitations that seem like they could have influenced the results, explain how they could have influenced the results, and suggest ways to deal with them.

Most discussions end with some suggestions for future research. If the study did not satisfactorily answer the original research question, what will it take to do so? What  new  research questions has the study raised? This part of the discussion, however, is not just a list of new questions. It is a discussion of two or three of the most important unresolved issues. This means identifying and clarifying each question, suggesting some alternative answers, and even suggesting ways they could be studied.

Finally, some researchers are quite good at ending their articles with a sweeping or thought-provoking conclusion. Darley and Latané (1968) [4] , for example, ended their article on the bystander effect by discussing the idea that whether people help others may depend more on the situation than on their personalities. Their final sentence is, “If people understand the situational forces that can make them hesitate to intervene, they may better overcome them” (p. 383). However, this kind of ending can be difficult to pull off. It can sound overreaching or just banal and end up detracting from the overall impact of the article. It is often better simply to end when you have made your final point (although you should avoid ending on a limitation).

The references section begins on a new page with the heading “References” centred at the top of the page. All references cited in the text are then listed in the format presented earlier. They are listed alphabetically by the last name of the first author. If two sources have the same first author, they are listed alphabetically by the last name of the second author. If all the authors are the same, then they are listed chronologically by the year of publication. Everything in the reference list is double-spaced both within and between references.

Appendices, Tables, and Figures

Appendices, tables, and figures come after the references. An  appendix  is appropriate for supplemental material that would interrupt the flow of the research report if it were presented within any of the major sections. An appendix could be used to present lists of stimulus words, questionnaire items, detailed descriptions of special equipment or unusual statistical analyses, or references to the studies that are included in a meta-analysis. Each appendix begins on a new page. If there is only one, the heading is “Appendix,” centred at the top of the page. If there is more than one, the headings are “Appendix A,” “Appendix B,” and so on, and they appear in the order they were first mentioned in the text of the report.

After any appendices come tables and then figures. Tables and figures are both used to present results. Figures can also be used to illustrate theories (e.g., in the form of a flowchart), display stimuli, outline procedures, and present many other kinds of information. Each table and figure appears on its own page. Tables are numbered in the order that they are first mentioned in the text (“Table 1,” “Table 2,” and so on). Figures are numbered the same way (“Figure 1,” “Figure 2,” and so on). A brief explanatory title, with the important words capitalized, appears above each table. Each figure is given a brief explanatory caption, where (aside from proper nouns or names) only the first word of each sentence is capitalized. More details on preparing APA-style tables and figures are presented later in the book.

Sample APA-Style Research Report

Figures 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, and 11.5 show some sample pages from an APA-style empirical research report originally written by undergraduate student Tomoe Suyama at California State University, Fresno. The main purpose of these figures is to illustrate the basic organization and formatting of an APA-style empirical research report, although many high-level and low-level style conventions can be seen here too.

Key Takeaways

• An APA-style empirical research report consists of several standard sections. The main ones are the abstract, introduction, method, results, discussion, and references.
• The introduction consists of an opening that presents the research question, a literature review that describes previous research on the topic, and a closing that restates the research question and comments on the method. The literature review constitutes an argument for why the current study is worth doing.
• The method section describes the method in enough detail that another researcher could replicate the study. At a minimum, it consists of a participants subsection and a design and procedure subsection.
• The results section describes the results in an organized fashion. Each primary result is presented in terms of statistical results but also explained in words.
• The discussion typically summarizes the study, discusses theoretical and practical implications and limitations of the study, and offers suggestions for further research.
• Practice: Look through an issue of a general interest professional journal (e.g.,  Psychological Science ). Read the opening of the first five articles and rate the effectiveness of each one from 1 ( very ineffective ) to 5 ( very effective ). Write a sentence or two explaining each rating.
• Practice: Find a recent article in a professional journal and identify where the opening, literature review, and closing of the introduction begin and end.
• Practice: Find a recent article in a professional journal and highlight in a different colour each of the following elements in the discussion: summary, theoretical implications, practical implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research.

Long Descriptions

Figure 11.1 long description: Table showing three ways of organizing an APA-style method section.

In the simple method, there are two subheadings: “Participants” (which might begin “The participants were…”) and “Design and procedure” (which might begin “There were three conditions…”).

In the typical method, there are three subheadings: “Participants” (“The participants were…”), “Design” (“There were three conditions…”), and “Procedure” (“Participants viewed each stimulus on the computer screen…”).

In the complex method, there are four subheadings: “Participants” (“The participants were…”), “Materials” (“The stimuli were…”), “Design” (“There were three conditions…”), and “Procedure” (“Participants viewed each stimulus on the computer screen…”). [Return to Figure 11.1]

• Bem, D. J. (2003). Writing the empirical journal article. In J. M. Darley, M. P. Zanna, & H. R. Roediger III (Eds.),  The compleat academic: A practical guide for the beginning social scientist  (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. ↵
• Darley, J. M., & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4 , 377–383. ↵

A type of research article which describes one or more new empirical studies conducted by the authors.

The page at the beginning of an APA-style research report containing the title of the article, the authors’ names, and their institutional affiliation.

A summary of a research study.

The third page of a manuscript containing the research question, the literature review, and comments about how to answer the research question.

An introduction to the research question and explanation for why this question is interesting.

A description of relevant previous research on the topic being discusses and an argument for why the research is worth addressing.

The end of the introduction, where the research question is reiterated and the method is commented upon.

The section of a research report where the method used to conduct the study is described.

The main results of the study, including the results from statistical analyses, are presented in a research article.

Section of a research report that summarizes the study's results and interprets them by referring back to the study's theoretical background.

Part of a research report which contains supplemental material.

Research Methods in Psychology - 2nd Canadian Edition Copyright © 2015 by Paul C. Price, Rajiv Jhangiani, & I-Chant A. Chiang is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

How To Write A Research Paper

Step-By-Step Tutorial With Examples + FREE Template

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewer: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | March 2024

For many students, crafting a strong research paper from scratch can feel like a daunting task – and rightly so! In this post, we’ll unpack what a research paper is, what it needs to do , and how to write one – in three easy steps. 🙂 

Overview: Writing A Research Paper

What (exactly) is a research paper.

• How to write a research paper
• Stage 1 : Topic & literature search
• Stage 2 : Structure & outline
• Stage 3 : Iterative writing
• Key takeaways

Let’s start by asking the most important question, “ What is a research paper? ”.

Simply put, a research paper is a scholarly written work where the writer (that’s you!) answers a specific question (this is called a research question ) through evidence-based arguments . Evidence-based is the keyword here. In other words, a research paper is different from an essay or other writing assignments that draw from the writer’s personal opinions or experiences. With a research paper, it’s all about building your arguments based on evidence (we’ll talk more about that evidence a little later).

Now, it’s worth noting that there are many different types of research papers , including analytical papers (the type I just described), argumentative papers, and interpretative papers. Here, we’ll focus on analytical papers , as these are some of the most common – but if you’re keen to learn about other types of research papers, be sure to check out the rest of the blog .

With that basic foundation laid, let’s get down to business and look at how to write a research paper .

Overview: The 3-Stage Process

While there are, of course, many potential approaches you can take to write a research paper, there are typically three stages to the writing process. So, in this tutorial, we’ll present a straightforward three-step process that we use when working with students at Grad Coach.

These three steps are:

• Finding a research topic and reviewing the existing literature
• Developing a provisional structure and outline for your paper, and
• Writing up your initial draft and then refining it iteratively

Let’s dig into each of these.

Need a helping hand?

Step 1: Find a topic and review the literature

As we mentioned earlier, in a research paper, you, as the researcher, will try to answer a question . More specifically, that’s called a research question , and it sets the direction of your entire paper. What’s important to understand though is that you’ll need to answer that research question with the help of high-quality sources – for example, journal articles, government reports, case studies, and so on. We’ll circle back to this in a minute.

The first stage of the research process is deciding on what your research question will be and then reviewing the existing literature (in other words, past studies and papers) to see what they say about that specific research question. In some cases, your professor may provide you with a predetermined research question (or set of questions). However, in many cases, you’ll need to find your own research question within a certain topic area.

Finding a strong research question hinges on identifying a meaningful research gap – in other words, an area that’s lacking in existing research. There’s a lot to unpack here, so if you wanna learn more, check out the plain-language explainer video below.

Once you’ve figured out which question (or questions) you’ll attempt to answer in your research paper, you’ll need to do a deep dive into the existing literature – this is called a “ literature search ”. Again, there are many ways to go about this, but your most likely starting point will be Google Scholar .

If you’re new to Google Scholar, think of it as Google for the academic world. You can start by simply entering a few different keywords that are relevant to your research question and it will then present a host of articles for you to review. What you want to pay close attention to here is the number of citations for each paper – the more citations a paper has, the more credible it is (generally speaking – there are some exceptions, of course).

Ideally, what you’re looking for are well-cited papers that are highly relevant to your topic. That said, keep in mind that citations are a cumulative metric , so older papers will often have more citations than newer papers – just because they’ve been around for longer. So, don’t fixate on this metric in isolation – relevance and recency are also very important.

Beyond Google Scholar, you’ll also definitely want to check out academic databases and aggregators such as Science Direct, PubMed, JStor and so on. These will often overlap with the results that you find in Google Scholar, but they can also reveal some hidden gems – so, be sure to check them out.

Once you’ve worked your way through all the literature, you’ll want to catalogue all this information in some sort of spreadsheet so that you can easily recall who said what, when and within what context. If you’d like, we’ve got a free literature spreadsheet that helps you do exactly that.

Step 2: Develop a structure and outline

With your research question pinned down and your literature digested and catalogued, it’s time to move on to planning your actual research paper .

It might sound obvious, but it’s really important to have some sort of rough outline in place before you start writing your paper. So often, we see students eagerly rushing into the writing phase, only to land up with a disjointed research paper that rambles on in multiple

Now, the secret here is to not get caught up in the fine details . Realistically, all you need at this stage is a bullet-point list that describes (in broad strokes) what you’ll discuss and in what order. It’s also useful to remember that you’re not glued to this outline – in all likelihood, you’ll chop and change some sections once you start writing, and that’s perfectly okay. What’s important is that you have some sort of roadmap in place from the start.

At this stage you might be wondering, “ But how should I structure my research paper? ”. Well, there’s no one-size-fits-all solution here, but in general, a research paper will consist of a few relatively standardised components:

• Introduction
• Literature review
• Methodology

Let’s take a look at each of these.

First up is the introduction section . As the name suggests, the purpose of the introduction is to set the scene for your research paper. There are usually (at least) four ingredients that go into this section – these are the background to the topic, the research problem and resultant research question , and the justification or rationale. If you’re interested, the video below unpacks the introduction section in more detail. 

The next section of your research paper will typically be your literature review . Remember all that literature you worked through earlier? Well, this is where you’ll present your interpretation of all that content . You’ll do this by writing about recent trends, developments, and arguments within the literature – but more specifically, those that are relevant to your research question . The literature review can oftentimes seem a little daunting, even to seasoned researchers, so be sure to check out our extensive collection of literature review content here .

With the introduction and lit review out of the way, the next section of your paper is the research methodology . In a nutshell, the methodology section should describe to your reader what you did (beyond just reviewing the existing literature) to answer your research question. For example, what data did you collect, how did you collect that data, how did you analyse that data and so on? For each choice, you’ll also need to justify why you chose to do it that way, and what the strengths and weaknesses of your approach were.

Now, it’s worth mentioning that for some research papers, this aspect of the project may be a lot simpler . For example, you may only need to draw on secondary sources (in other words, existing data sets). In some cases, you may just be asked to draw your conclusions from the literature search itself (in other words, there may be no data analysis at all). But, if you are required to collect and analyse data, you’ll need to pay a lot of attention to the methodology section. The video below provides an example of what the methodology section might look like.

By this stage of your paper, you will have explained what your research question is, what the existing literature has to say about that question, and how you analysed additional data to try to answer your question. So, the natural next step is to present your analysis of that data . This section is usually called the “results” or “analysis” section and this is where you’ll showcase your findings.

Depending on your school’s requirements, you may need to present and interpret the data in one section – or you might split the presentation and the interpretation into two sections. In the latter case, your “results” section will just describe the data, and the “discussion” is where you’ll interpret that data and explicitly link your analysis back to your research question. If you’re not sure which approach to take, check in with your professor or take a look at past papers to see what the norms are for your programme.

Alright – once you’ve presented and discussed your results, it’s time to wrap it up . This usually takes the form of the “ conclusion ” section. In the conclusion, you’ll need to highlight the key takeaways from your study and close the loop by explicitly answering your research question. Again, the exact requirements here will vary depending on your programme (and you may not even need a conclusion section at all) – so be sure to check with your professor if you’re unsure.

Step 3: Write and refine

Finally, it’s time to get writing. All too often though, students hit a brick wall right about here… So, how do you avoid this happening to you?

Well, there’s a lot to be said when it comes to writing a research paper (or any sort of academic piece), but we’ll share three practical tips to help you get started.

First and foremost , it’s essential to approach your writing as an iterative process. In other words, you need to start with a really messy first draft and then polish it over multiple rounds of editing. Don’t waste your time trying to write a perfect research paper in one go. Instead, take the pressure off yourself by adopting an iterative approach.

Secondly , it’s important to always lean towards critical writing , rather than descriptive writing. What does this mean? Well, at the simplest level, descriptive writing focuses on the “ what ”, while critical writing digs into the “ so what ” – in other words, the implications . If you’re not familiar with these two types of writing, don’t worry! You can find a plain-language explanation here.

Last but not least, you’ll need to get your referencing right. Specifically, you’ll need to provide credible, correctly formatted citations for the statements you make. We see students making referencing mistakes all the time and it costs them dearly. The good news is that you can easily avoid this by using a simple reference manager . If you don’t have one, check out our video about Mendeley, an easy (and free) reference management tool that you can start using today.

Recap: Key Takeaways

We’ve covered a lot of ground here. To recap, the three steps to writing a high-quality research paper are:

• To choose a research question and review the literature
• To plan your paper structure and draft an outline
• To take an iterative approach to writing, focusing on critical writing and strong referencing

Remember, this is just a b ig-picture overview of the research paper development process and there’s a lot more nuance to unpack. So, be sure to grab a copy of our free research paper template to learn more about how to write a research paper.

You Might Also Like:

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

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

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

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

What is a Research Report?

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

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

Features of a Research Report 

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

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

Types of Research Report 

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

Nature of Research

• Qualitative Research Report

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

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

• Quantitative Research Report

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

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

Target Audience

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

• Technical Research Report

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

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

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

• Popular Research Report

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

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

Importance of a Research Report 

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

Guide to Writing a Research Report

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

Structure and Example of a Research Report

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

• Table of Contents

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

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

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

• Introduction

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

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

• Literature Review

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

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

• An Account of Investigation

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

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

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

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

• Conclusions

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

• References and Appendices

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

Tips for Writing a Research Report

• Define the Context for the Report

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

• Define your Audience

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

• Include Significant Findings

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

• Include Illustrations

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

• Choose the Right Title

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

• Proofread the Report

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

How to Gather Research Data for Your Report  

• Understand the Problem

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

• Know what your report seeks to achieve

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

• Identify your audience

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

• Create Surveys/Questionnaires

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

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

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

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

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

• Sign into Formplus

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

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

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

Conclusion  

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

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

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

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

You may also like:

How to Write a Problem Statement for your Research

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

Assessment Tools: Types, Examples & Importance

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

Ethnographic Research: Types, Methods + [Question Examples]

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

21 Chrome Extensions for Academic Researchers in 2022

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

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

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

• Academic Skills
• Reading, writing and referencing

Research reports

This resource will help you identify the common elements and basic format of a research report.

Research reports generally follow a similar structure and have common elements, each with a particular purpose. Learn more about each of these elements below.

Common elements of reports

Your title should be brief, topic-specific, and informative, clearly indicating the purpose and scope of your study. Include key words in your title so that search engines can easily access your work. For example:  Measurement of water around Station Pier.

An abstract is a concise summary that helps readers to quickly assess the content and direction of your paper. It should be brief, written in a single paragraph and cover: the scope and purpose of your report; an overview of methodology; a summary of the main findings or results; principal conclusions or significance of the findings; and recommendations made.

The information in the abstract must be presented in the same order as it is in your report. The abstract is usually written last when you have developed your arguments and synthesised the results.

The introduction creates the context for your research. It should provide sufficient background to allow the reader to understand and evaluate your study without needing to refer to previous publications. After reading the introduction your reader should understand exactly what your research is about, what you plan to do, why you are undertaking this research and which methods you have used. Introductions generally include:

• The rationale for the present study. Why are you interested in this topic? Why is this topic worth investigating?
• Key terms and definitions.
• An outline of the research questions and hypotheses; the assumptions or propositions that your research will test.

Not all research reports have a separate literature review section. In shorter research reports, the review is usually part of the Introduction.

A literature review is a critical survey of recent relevant research in a particular field. The review should be a selection of carefully organised, focused and relevant literature that develops a narrative ‘story’ about your topic. Your review should answer key questions about the literature:

• What is the current state of knowledge on the topic?
• What differences in approaches / methodologies are there?
• Where are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?
• What further research is needed? The review may identify a gap in the literature which provides a rationale for your study and supports your research questions and methodology.

The review is not just a summary of all you have read. Rather, it must develop an argument or a point of view that supports your chosen methodology and research questions.

The purpose of this section is to detail how you conducted your research so that others can understand and replicate your approach.

You need to briefly describe the subjects (if appropriate), any equipment or materials used and the approach taken. If the research method or method of data analysis is commonly used within your field of study, then simply reference the procedure. If, however, your methods are new or controversial then you need to describe them in more detail and provide a rationale for your approach. The methodology is written in the past tense and should be as concise as possible.

This section is a concise, factual summary of your findings, listed under headings appropriate to your research questions. It’s common to use tables and graphics. Raw data or details about the method of statistical analysis used should be included in the Appendices.

Present your results in a consistent manner. For example, if you present the first group of results as percentages, it will be confusing for the reader and difficult to make comparisons of data if later results are presented as fractions or as decimal values.

In general, you won’t discuss your results here. Any analysis of your results usually occurs in the Discussion section.

Notes on visual data representation:

• Graphs and tables may be used to reveal trends in your data, but they must be explained and referred to in adjacent accompanying text.
• Figures and tables do not simply repeat information given in the text: they summarise, amplify or complement it.
• Graphs are always referred to as ‘Figures’, and both axes must be clearly labelled.
• Tables must be numbered, and they must be able to stand-alone or make sense without your reader needing to read all of the accompanying text.

The Discussion responds to the hypothesis or research question. This section is where you interpret your results, account for your findings and explain their significance within the context of other research. Consider the adequacy of your sampling techniques, the scope and long-term implications of your study, any problems with data collection or analysis and any assumptions on which your study was based. This is also the place to discuss any disappointing results and address limitations.

Checklist for the discussion

• To what extent was each hypothesis supported?
• To what extent are your findings validated or supported by other research?
• Were there unexpected variables that affected your results?
• On reflection, was your research method appropriate?
• Can you account for any differences between your results and other studies?

Conclusions in research reports are generally fairly short and should follow on naturally from points raised in the Discussion. In this section you should discuss the significance of your findings. To what extent and in what ways are your findings useful or conclusive? Is further research required? If so, based on your research experience, what suggestions could you make about improvements to the scope or methodology of future studies?

Also, consider the practical implications of your results and any recommendations you could make. For example, if your research is on reading strategies in the primary school classroom, what are the implications of your results for the classroom teacher? What recommendations could you make for teachers?

A Reference List contains all the resources you have cited in your work, while a Bibliography is a wider list containing all the resources you have consulted (but not necessarily cited) in the preparation of your work. It is important to check which of these is required, and the preferred format, style of references and presentation requirements of your own department.

Appendices (singular ‘Appendix’) provide supporting material to your project. Examples of such materials include:

• Relevant letters to participants and organisations (e.g. regarding the ethics or conduct of the project).
• Background reports.
• Detailed calculations.

Different types of data are presented in separate appendices. Each appendix must be titled, labelled with a number or letter, and referred to in the body of the report.

Appendices are placed at the end of a report, and the contents are generally not included in the word count.

Fi nal ti p

While there are many common elements to research reports, it’s always best to double check the exact requirements for your task. You may find that you don’t need some sections, can combine others or have specific requirements about referencing, formatting or word limits.

Looking for one-on-one advice?

Get tailored advice from an Academic Skills Adviser by booking an Individual appointment, or get quick feedback from one of our Academic Writing Mentors via email through our Writing advice service.

Go to Student appointments

Writing up a Research Report

• First Online: 04 January 2024

Cite this chapter

• Stefan Hunziker 3 &
• Michael Blankenagel 3  

386 Accesses

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

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

Access this chapter

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

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

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

Google Scholar  

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

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

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

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

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

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

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

Stefan Hunziker & Michael Blankenagel

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Hunziker .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

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

Download citation

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

Published : 04 January 2024

Publisher Name : Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

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

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

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

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research

Research Reports: Definition and How to Write Them

Reports are usually spread across a vast horizon of topics but are focused on communicating information about a particular topic and a niche target market. The primary motive of research reports is to convey integral details about a study for marketers to consider while designing new strategies.

Certain events, facts, and other information based on incidents need to be relayed to the people in charge, and creating research reports is the most effective communication tool. Ideal research reports are extremely accurate in the offered information with a clear objective and conclusion. These reports should have a clean and structured format to relay information effectively.

What are Research Reports?

Research reports are recorded data prepared by researchers or statisticians after analyzing the information gathered by conducting organized research, typically in the form of surveys or qualitative methods .

A research report is a reliable source to recount details about a conducted research. It is most often considered to be a true testimony of all the work done to garner specificities of research.

The various sections of a research report are:

• Background/Introduction
• Implemented Methods
• Results based on Analysis
• Deliberation

Learn more: Quantitative Research

Components of Research Reports

Research is imperative for launching a new product/service or a new feature. The markets today are extremely volatile and competitive due to new entrants every day who may or may not provide effective products. An organization needs to make the right decisions at the right time to be relevant in such a market with updated products that suffice customer demands.

The details of a research report may change with the purpose of research but the main components of a report will remain constant. The research approach of the market researcher also influences the style of writing reports. Here are seven main components of a productive research report:

• Research Report Summary: The entire objective along with the overview of research are to be included in a summary which is a couple of paragraphs in length. All the multiple components of the research are explained in brief under the report summary.  It should be interesting enough to capture all the key elements of the report.
• Research Introduction: There always is a primary goal that the researcher is trying to achieve through a report. In the introduction section, he/she can cover answers related to this goal and establish a thesis which will be included to strive and answer it in detail.  This section should answer an integral question: “What is the current situation of the goal?”.  After the research design was conducted, did the organization conclude the goal successfully or they are still a work in progress –  provide such details in the introduction part of the research report.
• Research Methodology: This is the most important section of the report where all the important information lies. The readers can gain data for the topic along with analyzing the quality of provided content and the research can also be approved by other market researchers . Thus, this section needs to be highly informative with each aspect of research discussed in detail.  Information needs to be expressed in chronological order according to its priority and importance. Researchers should include references in case they gained information from existing techniques.
• Research Results: A short description of the results along with calculations conducted to achieve the goal will form this section of results. Usually, the exposition after data analysis is carried out in the discussion part of the report.

Learn more: Quantitative Data

• Research Discussion: The results are discussed in extreme detail in this section along with a comparative analysis of reports that could probably exist in the same domain. Any abnormality uncovered during research will be deliberated in the discussion section.  While writing research reports, the researcher will have to connect the dots on how the results will be applicable in the real world.
• Research References and Conclusion: Conclude all the research findings along with mentioning each and every author, article or any content piece from where references were taken.

Learn more: Qualitative Observation

15 Tips for Writing Research Reports

Writing research reports in the manner can lead to all the efforts going down the drain. Here are 15 tips for writing impactful research reports:

• Prepare the context before starting to write and start from the basics:  This was always taught to us in school – be well-prepared before taking a plunge into new topics. The order of survey questions might not be the ideal or most effective order for writing research reports. The idea is to start with a broader topic and work towards a more specific one and focus on a conclusion or support, which a research should support with the facts.  The most difficult thing to do in reporting, without a doubt is to start. Start with the title, the introduction, then document the first discoveries and continue from that. Once the marketers have the information well documented, they can write a general conclusion.
• Keep the target audience in mind while selecting a format that is clear, logical and obvious to them:  Will the research reports be presented to decision makers or other researchers? What are the general perceptions around that topic? This requires more care and diligence. A researcher will need a significant amount of information to start writing the research report. Be consistent with the wording, the numbering of the annexes and so on. Follow the approved format of the company for the delivery of research reports and demonstrate the integrity of the project with the objectives of the company.
• Have a clear research objective: A researcher should read the entire proposal again, and make sure that the data they provide contributes to the objectives that were raised from the beginning. Remember that speculations are for conversations, not for research reports, if a researcher speculates, they directly question their own research.
• Establish a working model:  Each study must have an internal logic, which will have to be established in the report and in the evidence. The researchers’ worst nightmare is to be required to write research reports and realize that key questions were not included.

Learn more: Quantitative Observation

• Gather all the information about the research topic. Who are the competitors of our customers? Talk to other researchers who have studied the subject of research, know the language of the industry. Misuse of the terms can discourage the readers of research reports from reading further.
• Read aloud while writing. While reading the report, if the researcher hears something inappropriate, for example, if they stumble over the words when reading them, surely the reader will too. If the researcher can’t put an idea in a single sentence, then it is very long and they must change it so that the idea is clear to everyone.
• Check grammar and spelling. Without a doubt, good practices help to understand the report. Use verbs in the present tense. Consider using the present tense, which makes the results sound more immediate. Find new words and other ways of saying things. Have fun with the language whenever possible.
• Discuss only the discoveries that are significant. If some data are not really significant, do not mention them. Remember that not everything is truly important or essential within research reports.

Learn more: Qualitative Data

• Try and stick to the survey questions. For example, do not say that the people surveyed “were worried” about an research issue , when there are different degrees of concern.
• The graphs must be clear enough so that they understand themselves. Do not let graphs lead the reader to make mistakes: give them a title, include the indications, the size of the sample, and the correct wording of the question.
• Be clear with messages. A researcher should always write every section of the report with an accuracy of details and language.
• Be creative with titles – Particularly in segmentation studies choose names “that give life to research”. Such names can survive for a long time after the initial investigation.
• Create an effective conclusion: The conclusion in the research reports is the most difficult to write, but it is an incredible opportunity to excel. Make a precise summary. Sometimes it helps to start the conclusion with something specific, then it describes the most important part of the study, and finally, it provides the implications of the conclusions.
• Get a couple more pair of eyes to read the report. Writers have trouble detecting their own mistakes. But they are responsible for what is presented. Ensure it has been approved by colleagues or friends before sending the find draft out.

Learn more: Market Research and Analysis

MORE LIKE THIS

Data Information vs Insight: Essential differences

May 14, 2024

Pricing Analytics Software: Optimize Your Pricing Strategy

May 13, 2024

Relationship Marketing: What It Is, Examples & Top 7 Benefits

May 8, 2024

The Best Email Survey Tool to Boost Your Feedback Game

May 7, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

11.2 Writing a Research Report in American Psychological Association (APA) Style

Learning objectives.

• Identify the major sections of an APA-style research report and the basic contents of each section.
• Plan and write an effective APA-style research report.

In this section, we look at how to write an APA-style empirical research report , an article that presents the results of one or more new studies. Recall that the standard sections of an empirical research report provide a kind of outline. Here we consider each of these sections in detail, including what information it contains, how that information is formatted and organized, and tips for writing each section. At the end of this section is a sample APA-style research report that illustrates many of these principles.

Sections of a Research Report

Title page and abstract.

An APA-style research report begins with a title page . The title is centered in the upper half of the page, with each important word capitalized. The title should clearly and concisely (in about 12 words or fewer) communicate the primary variables and research questions. This sometimes requires a main title followed by a subtitle that elaborates on the main title, in which case the main title and subtitle are separated by a colon. Here are some titles from recent issues of professional journals published by the American Psychological Association.

• Sex Differences in Coping Styles and Implications for Depressed Mood
• Effects of Aging and Divided Attention on Memory for Items and Their Contexts
• Computer-Assisted Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Child Anxiety: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial
• Virtual Driving and Risk Taking: Do Racing Games Increase Risk-Taking Cognitions, Affect, and Behavior?

Below the title are the authors’ names and, on the next line, their institutional affiliation—the university or other institution where the authors worked when they conducted the research. As we have already seen, the authors are listed in an order that reflects their contribution to the research. When multiple authors have made equal contributions to the research, they often list their names alphabetically or in a randomly determined order.

It’s Soooo Cute!

How Informal Should an Article Title Be?

In some areas of psychology, the titles of many empirical research reports are informal in a way that is perhaps best described as “cute.” They usually take the form of a play on words or a well-known expression that relates to the topic under study. Here are some examples from recent issues of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology .

• “Let’s Get Serious: Communicating Commitment in Romantic Relationships”
• “Through the Looking Glass Clearly: Accuracy and Assumed Similarity in Well-Adjusted Individuals’ First Impressions”
• “Don’t Hide Your Happiness! Positive Emotion Dissociation, Social Connectedness, and Psychological Functioning”
• “Forbidden Fruit: Inattention to Attractive Alternatives Provokes Implicit Relationship Reactance”

Individual researchers differ quite a bit in their preference for such titles. Some use them regularly, while others never use them. What might be some of the pros and cons of using cute article titles?

For articles that are being submitted for publication, the title page also includes an author note that lists the authors’ full institutional affiliations, any acknowledgments the authors wish to make to agencies that funded the research or to colleagues who commented on it, and contact information for the authors. For student papers that are not being submitted for publication—including theses—author notes are generally not necessary.

The abstract is a summary of the study. It is the second page of the manuscript and is headed with the word Abstract . The first line is not indented. The abstract presents the research question, a summary of the method, the basic results, and the most important conclusions. Because the abstract is usually limited to about 200 words, it can be a challenge to write a good one.

Introduction

The introduction begins on the third page of the manuscript. The heading at the top of this page is the full title of the manuscript, with each important word capitalized as on the title page. The introduction includes three distinct subsections, although these are typically not identified by separate headings. The opening introduces the research question and explains why it is interesting, the literature review discusses relevant previous research, and the closing restates the research question and comments on the method used to answer it.

The Opening

The opening , which is usually a paragraph or two in length, introduces the research question and explains why it is interesting. To capture the reader’s attention, researcher Daryl Bem recommends starting with general observations about the topic under study, expressed in ordinary language (not technical jargon)—observations that are about people and their behavior (not about researchers or their research; Bem, 2003). Concrete examples are often very useful here. According to Bem, this would be a poor way to begin a research report:

Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance received a great deal of attention during the latter part of the 20th century (p. 191)

The following would be much better:

The individual who holds two beliefs that are inconsistent with one another may feel uncomfortable. For example, the person who knows that he or she enjoys smoking but believes it to be unhealthy may experience discomfort arising from the inconsistency or disharmony between these two thoughts or cognitions. This feeling of discomfort was called cognitive dissonance by social psychologist Leon Festinger (1957), who suggested that individuals will be motivated to remove this dissonance in whatever way they can (p. 191).

After capturing the reader’s attention, the opening should go on to introduce the research question and explain why it is interesting. Will the answer fill a gap in the literature? Will it provide a test of an important theory? Does it have practical implications? Giving readers a clear sense of what the research is about and why they should care about it will motivate them to continue reading the literature review—and will help them make sense of it.

Breaking the Rules

Researcher Larry Jacoby reported several studies showing that a word that people see or hear repeatedly can seem more familiar even when they do not recall the repetitions—and that this tendency is especially pronounced among older adults. He opened his article with the following humorous anecdote (Jacoby, 1999).

A friend whose mother is suffering symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) tells the story of taking her mother to visit a nursing home, preliminary to her mother’s moving there. During an orientation meeting at the nursing home, the rules and regulations were explained, one of which regarded the dining room. The dining room was described as similar to a fine restaurant except that tipping was not required. The absence of tipping was a central theme in the orientation lecture, mentioned frequently to emphasize the quality of care along with the advantages of having paid in advance. At the end of the meeting, the friend’s mother was asked whether she had any questions. She replied that she only had one question: “Should I tip?” (p. 3).

Although both humor and personal anecdotes are generally discouraged in APA-style writing, this example is a highly effective way to start because it both engages the reader and provides an excellent real-world example of the topic under study.

The Literature Review

Immediately after the opening comes the literature review , which describes relevant previous research on the topic and can be anywhere from several paragraphs to several pages in length. However, the literature review is not simply a list of past studies. Instead, it constitutes a kind of argument for why the research question is worth addressing. By the end of the literature review, readers should be convinced that the research question makes sense and that the present study is a logical next step in the ongoing research process.

Like any effective argument, the literature review must have some kind of structure. For example, it might begin by describing a phenomenon in a general way along with several studies that demonstrate it, then describing two or more competing theories of the phenomenon, and finally presenting a hypothesis to test one or more of the theories. Or it might describe one phenomenon, then describe another phenomenon that seems inconsistent with the first one, then propose a theory that resolves the inconsistency, and finally present a hypothesis to test that theory. In applied research, it might describe a phenomenon or theory, then describe how that phenomenon or theory applies to some important real-world situation, and finally suggest a way to test whether it does, in fact, apply to that situation.

Looking at the literature review in this way emphasizes a few things. First, it is extremely important to start with an outline of the main points that you want to make, organized in the order that you want to make them. The basic structure of your argument, then, should be apparent from the outline itself. Second, it is important to emphasize the structure of your argument in your writing. One way to do this is to begin the literature review by summarizing your argument even before you begin to make it. “In this article, I will describe two apparently contradictory phenomena, present a new theory that has the potential to resolve the apparent contradiction, and finally present a novel hypothesis to test the theory.” Another way is to open each paragraph with a sentence that summarizes the main point of the paragraph and links it to the preceding points. These opening sentences provide the “transitions” that many beginning researchers have difficulty with. Instead of beginning a paragraph by launching into a description of a previous study, such as “Williams (2004) found that…,” it is better to start by indicating something about why you are describing this particular study. Here are some simple examples:

Another example of this phenomenon comes from the work of Williams (2004).

Williams (2004) offers one explanation of this phenomenon.

An alternative perspective has been provided by Williams (2004).

We used a method based on the one used by Williams (2004).

Finally, remember that your goal is to construct an argument for why your research question is interesting and worth addressing—not necessarily why your favorite answer to it is correct. In other words, your literature review must be balanced. If you want to emphasize the generality of a phenomenon, then of course you should discuss various studies that have demonstrated it. However, if there are other studies that have failed to demonstrate it, you should discuss them too. Or if you are proposing a new theory, then of course you should discuss findings that are consistent with that theory. However, if there are other findings that are inconsistent with it, again, you should discuss them too. It is acceptable to argue that the balance of the research supports the existence of a phenomenon or is consistent with a theory (and that is usually the best that researchers in psychology can hope for), but it is not acceptable to ignore contradictory evidence. Besides, a large part of what makes a research question interesting is uncertainty about its answer.

The Closing

The closing of the introduction—typically the final paragraph or two—usually includes two important elements. The first is a clear statement of the main research question or hypothesis. This statement tends to be more formal and precise than in the opening and is often expressed in terms of operational definitions of the key variables. The second is a brief overview of the method and some comment on its appropriateness. Here, for example, is how Darley and Latané (1968) concluded the introduction to their classic article on the bystander effect:

These considerations lead to the hypothesis that the more bystanders to an emergency, the less likely, or the more slowly, any one bystander will intervene to provide aid. To test this proposition it would be necessary to create a situation in which a realistic “emergency” could plausibly occur. Each subject should also be blocked from communicating with others to prevent his getting information about their behavior during the emergency. Finally, the experimental situation should allow for the assessment of the speed and frequency of the subjects’ reaction to the emergency. The experiment reported below attempted to fulfill these conditions (p. 378).

Thus the introduction leads smoothly into the next major section of the article—the method section.

The method section is where you describe how you conducted your study. An important principle for writing a method section is that it should be clear and detailed enough that other researchers could replicate the study by following your “recipe.” This means that it must describe all the important elements of the study—basic demographic characteristics of the participants, how they were recruited, whether they were randomly assigned, how the variables were manipulated or measured, how counterbalancing was accomplished, and so on. At the same time, it should avoid irrelevant details such as the fact that the study was conducted in Classroom 37B of the Industrial Technology Building or that the questionnaire was double-sided and completed using pencils.

The method section begins immediately after the introduction ends with the heading “Method” (not “Methods”) centered on the page. Immediately after this is the subheading “Participants,” left justified and in italics. The participants subsection indicates how many participants there were, the number of women and men, some indication of their age, other demographics that may be relevant to the study, and how they were recruited, including any incentives given for participation.

Figure 11.1 Three Ways of Organizing an APA-Style Method

After the participants section, the structure can vary a bit. Figure 11.1 “Three Ways of Organizing an APA-Style Method” shows three common approaches. In the first, the participants section is followed by a design and procedure subsection, which describes the rest of the method. This works well for methods that are relatively simple and can be described adequately in a few paragraphs. In the second approach, the participants section is followed by separate design and procedure subsections. This works well when both the design and the procedure are relatively complicated and each requires multiple paragraphs.

What is the difference between design and procedure? The design of a study is its overall structure. What were the independent and dependent variables? Was the independent variable manipulated, and if so, was it manipulated between or within subjects? How were the variables operationally defined? The procedure is how the study was carried out. It often works well to describe the procedure in terms of what the participants did rather than what the researchers did. For example, the participants gave their informed consent, read a set of instructions, completed a block of four practice trials, completed a block of 20 test trials, completed two questionnaires, and were debriefed and excused.

In the third basic way to organize a method section, the participants subsection is followed by a materials subsection before the design and procedure subsections. This works well when there are complicated materials to describe. This might mean multiple questionnaires, written vignettes that participants read and respond to, perceptual stimuli, and so on. The heading of this subsection can be modified to reflect its content. Instead of “Materials,” it can be “Questionnaires,” “Stimuli,” and so on.

The results section is where you present the main results of the study, including the results of the statistical analyses. Although it does not include the raw data—individual participants’ responses or scores—researchers should save their raw data and make them available to other researchers who request them. Some journals now make the raw data available online.

Although there are no standard subsections, it is still important for the results section to be logically organized. Typically it begins with certain preliminary issues. One is whether any participants or responses were excluded from the analyses and why. The rationale for excluding data should be described clearly so that other researchers can decide whether it is appropriate. A second preliminary issue is how multiple responses were combined to produce the primary variables in the analyses. For example, if participants rated the attractiveness of 20 stimulus people, you might have to explain that you began by computing the mean attractiveness rating for each participant. Or if they recalled as many items as they could from study list of 20 words, did you count the number correctly recalled, compute the percentage correctly recalled, or perhaps compute the number correct minus the number incorrect? A third preliminary issue is the reliability of the measures. This is where you would present test-retest correlations, Cronbach’s α, or other statistics to show that the measures are consistent across time and across items. A final preliminary issue is whether the manipulation was successful. This is where you would report the results of any manipulation checks.

The results section should then tackle the primary research questions, one at a time. Again, there should be a clear organization. One approach would be to answer the most general questions and then proceed to answer more specific ones. Another would be to answer the main question first and then to answer secondary ones. Regardless, Bem (2003) suggests the following basic structure for discussing each new result:

• Remind the reader of the research question.
• Give the answer to the research question in words.
• Present the relevant statistics.
• Qualify the answer if necessary.
• Summarize the result.

Notice that only Step 3 necessarily involves numbers. The rest of the steps involve presenting the research question and the answer to it in words. In fact, the basic results should be clear even to a reader who skips over the numbers.

The discussion is the last major section of the research report. Discussions usually consist of some combination of the following elements:

• Summary of the research
• Theoretical implications
• Practical implications
• Limitations
• Suggestions for future research

The discussion typically begins with a summary of the study that provides a clear answer to the research question. In a short report with a single study, this might require no more than a sentence. In a longer report with multiple studies, it might require a paragraph or even two. The summary is often followed by a discussion of the theoretical implications of the research. Do the results provide support for any existing theories? If not, how can they be explained? Although you do not have to provide a definitive explanation or detailed theory for your results, you at least need to outline one or more possible explanations. In applied research—and often in basic research—there is also some discussion of the practical implications of the research. How can the results be used, and by whom, to accomplish some real-world goal?

The theoretical and practical implications are often followed by a discussion of the study’s limitations. Perhaps there are problems with its internal or external validity. Perhaps the manipulation was not very effective or the measures not very reliable. Perhaps there is some evidence that participants did not fully understand their task or that they were suspicious of the intent of the researchers. Now is the time to discuss these issues and how they might have affected the results. But do not overdo it. All studies have limitations, and most readers will understand that a different sample or different measures might have produced different results. Unless there is good reason to think they would have, however, there is no reason to mention these routine issues. Instead, pick two or three limitations that seem like they could have influenced the results, explain how they could have influenced the results, and suggest ways to deal with them.

Most discussions end with some suggestions for future research. If the study did not satisfactorily answer the original research question, what will it take to do so? What new research questions has the study raised? This part of the discussion, however, is not just a list of new questions. It is a discussion of two or three of the most important unresolved issues. This means identifying and clarifying each question, suggesting some alternative answers, and even suggesting ways they could be studied.

Finally, some researchers are quite good at ending their articles with a sweeping or thought-provoking conclusion. Darley and Latané (1968), for example, ended their article on the bystander effect by discussing the idea that whether people help others may depend more on the situation than on their personalities. Their final sentence is, “If people understand the situational forces that can make them hesitate to intervene, they may better overcome them” (p. 383). However, this kind of ending can be difficult to pull off. It can sound overreaching or just banal and end up detracting from the overall impact of the article. It is often better simply to end when you have made your final point (although you should avoid ending on a limitation).

The references section begins on a new page with the heading “References” centered at the top of the page. All references cited in the text are then listed in the format presented earlier. They are listed alphabetically by the last name of the first author. If two sources have the same first author, they are listed alphabetically by the last name of the second author. If all the authors are the same, then they are listed chronologically by the year of publication. Everything in the reference list is double-spaced both within and between references.

Appendixes, Tables, and Figures

Appendixes, tables, and figures come after the references. An appendix is appropriate for supplemental material that would interrupt the flow of the research report if it were presented within any of the major sections. An appendix could be used to present lists of stimulus words, questionnaire items, detailed descriptions of special equipment or unusual statistical analyses, or references to the studies that are included in a meta-analysis. Each appendix begins on a new page. If there is only one, the heading is “Appendix,” centered at the top of the page. If there is more than one, the headings are “Appendix A,” “Appendix B,” and so on, and they appear in the order they were first mentioned in the text of the report.

After any appendixes come tables and then figures. Tables and figures are both used to present results. Figures can also be used to illustrate theories (e.g., in the form of a flowchart), display stimuli, outline procedures, and present many other kinds of information. Each table and figure appears on its own page. Tables are numbered in the order that they are first mentioned in the text (“Table 1,” “Table 2,” and so on). Figures are numbered the same way (“Figure 1,” “Figure 2,” and so on). A brief explanatory title, with the important words capitalized, appears above each table. Each figure is given a brief explanatory caption, where (aside from proper nouns or names) only the first word of each sentence is capitalized. More details on preparing APA-style tables and figures are presented later in the book.

Sample APA-Style Research Report

Figure 11.2 “Title Page and Abstract” , Figure 11.3 “Introduction and Method” , Figure 11.4 “Results and Discussion” , and Figure 11.5 “References and Figure” show some sample pages from an APA-style empirical research report originally written by undergraduate student Tomoe Suyama at California State University, Fresno. The main purpose of these figures is to illustrate the basic organization and formatting of an APA-style empirical research report, although many high-level and low-level style conventions can be seen here too.

Figure 11.2 Title Page and Abstract

This student paper does not include the author note on the title page. The abstract appears on its own page.

Figure 11.3 Introduction and Method

Note that the introduction is headed with the full title, and the method section begins immediately after the introduction ends.

Figure 11.4 Results and Discussion

The discussion begins immediately after the results section ends.

Figure 11.5 References and Figure

If there were appendixes or tables, they would come before the figure.

Key Takeaways

• An APA-style empirical research report consists of several standard sections. The main ones are the abstract, introduction, method, results, discussion, and references.
• The introduction consists of an opening that presents the research question, a literature review that describes previous research on the topic, and a closing that restates the research question and comments on the method. The literature review constitutes an argument for why the current study is worth doing.
• The method section describes the method in enough detail that another researcher could replicate the study. At a minimum, it consists of a participants subsection and a design and procedure subsection.
• The results section describes the results in an organized fashion. Each primary result is presented in terms of statistical results but also explained in words.
• The discussion typically summarizes the study, discusses theoretical and practical implications and limitations of the study, and offers suggestions for further research.
• Practice: Look through an issue of a general interest professional journal (e.g., Psychological Science ). Read the opening of the first five articles and rate the effectiveness of each one from 1 ( very ineffective ) to 5 ( very effective ). Write a sentence or two explaining each rating.
• Practice: Find a recent article in a professional journal and identify where the opening, literature review, and closing of the introduction begin and end.
• Practice: Find a recent article in a professional journal and highlight in a different color each of the following elements in the discussion: summary, theoretical implications, practical implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research.

Bem, D. J. (2003). Writing the empirical journal article. In J. M. Darley, M. P. Zanna, & H. R. Roediger III (Eds.), The compleat academic: A practical guide for the beginning social scientist (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Darley, J. M., & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4 , 377–383.

Research Methods in Psychology Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Scientific Reports

What this handout is about.

This handout provides a general guide to writing reports about scientific research you’ve performed. In addition to describing the conventional rules about the format and content of a lab report, we’ll also attempt to convey why these rules exist, so you’ll get a clearer, more dependable idea of how to approach this writing situation. Readers of this handout may also find our handout on writing in the sciences useful.

Background and pre-writing

Why do we write research reports.

You did an experiment or study for your science class, and now you have to write it up for your teacher to review. You feel that you understood the background sufficiently, designed and completed the study effectively, obtained useful data, and can use those data to draw conclusions about a scientific process or principle. But how exactly do you write all that? What is your teacher expecting to see?

To take some of the guesswork out of answering these questions, try to think beyond the classroom setting. In fact, you and your teacher are both part of a scientific community, and the people who participate in this community tend to share the same values. As long as you understand and respect these values, your writing will likely meet the expectations of your audience—including your teacher.

So why are you writing this research report? The practical answer is “Because the teacher assigned it,” but that’s classroom thinking. Generally speaking, people investigating some scientific hypothesis have a responsibility to the rest of the scientific world to report their findings, particularly if these findings add to or contradict previous ideas. The people reading such reports have two primary goals:

• They want to gather the information presented.
• They want to know that the findings are legitimate.

Your job as a writer, then, is to fulfill these two goals.

How do I do that?

Good question. Here is the basic format scientists have designed for research reports:

• Introduction

Methods and Materials

This format, sometimes called “IMRAD,” may take slightly different shapes depending on the discipline or audience; some ask you to include an abstract or separate section for the hypothesis, or call the Discussion section “Conclusions,” or change the order of the sections (some professional and academic journals require the Methods section to appear last). Overall, however, the IMRAD format was devised to represent a textual version of the scientific method.

The scientific method, you’ll probably recall, involves developing a hypothesis, testing it, and deciding whether your findings support the hypothesis. In essence, the format for a research report in the sciences mirrors the scientific method but fleshes out the process a little. Below, you’ll find a table that shows how each written section fits into the scientific method and what additional information it offers the reader.

Thinking of your research report as based on the scientific method, but elaborated in the ways described above, may help you to meet your audience’s expectations successfully. We’re going to proceed by explicitly connecting each section of the lab report to the scientific method, then explaining why and how you need to elaborate that section.

Although this handout takes each section in the order in which it should be presented in the final report, you may for practical reasons decide to compose sections in another order. For example, many writers find that composing their Methods and Results before the other sections helps to clarify their idea of the experiment or study as a whole. You might consider using each assignment to practice different approaches to drafting the report, to find the order that works best for you.

What should I do before drafting the lab report?

The best way to prepare to write the lab report is to make sure that you fully understand everything you need to about the experiment. Obviously, if you don’t quite know what went on during the lab, you’re going to find it difficult to explain the lab satisfactorily to someone else. To make sure you know enough to write the report, complete the following steps:

• What are we going to do in this lab? (That is, what’s the procedure?)
• Why are we going to do it that way?
• What are we hoping to learn from this experiment?
• Why would we benefit from this knowledge?
• Consult your lab supervisor as you perform the lab. If you don’t know how to answer one of the questions above, for example, your lab supervisor will probably be able to explain it to you (or, at least, help you figure it out).
• Plan the steps of the experiment carefully with your lab partners. The less you rush, the more likely it is that you’ll perform the experiment correctly and record your findings accurately. Also, take some time to think about the best way to organize the data before you have to start putting numbers down. If you can design a table to account for the data, that will tend to work much better than jotting results down hurriedly on a scrap piece of paper.
• Record the data carefully so you get them right. You won’t be able to trust your conclusions if you have the wrong data, and your readers will know you messed up if the other three people in your group have “97 degrees” and you have “87.”
• Consult with your lab partners about everything you do. Lab groups often make one of two mistakes: two people do all the work while two have a nice chat, or everybody works together until the group finishes gathering the raw data, then scrams outta there. Collaborate with your partners, even when the experiment is “over.” What trends did you observe? Was the hypothesis supported? Did you all get the same results? What kind of figure should you use to represent your findings? The whole group can work together to answer these questions.
• Consider your audience. You may believe that audience is a non-issue: it’s your lab TA, right? Well, yes—but again, think beyond the classroom. If you write with only your lab instructor in mind, you may omit material that is crucial to a complete understanding of your experiment, because you assume the instructor knows all that stuff already. As a result, you may receive a lower grade, since your TA won’t be sure that you understand all the principles at work. Try to write towards a student in the same course but a different lab section. That student will have a fair degree of scientific expertise but won’t know much about your experiment particularly. Alternatively, you could envision yourself five years from now, after the reading and lectures for this course have faded a bit. What would you remember, and what would you need explained more clearly (as a refresher)?

Once you’ve completed these steps as you perform the experiment, you’ll be in a good position to draft an effective lab report.

Introductions

How do i write a strong introduction.

For the purposes of this handout, we’ll consider the Introduction to contain four basic elements: the purpose, the scientific literature relevant to the subject, the hypothesis, and the reasons you believed your hypothesis viable. Let’s start by going through each element of the Introduction to clarify what it covers and why it’s important. Then we can formulate a logical organizational strategy for the section.

The inclusion of the purpose (sometimes called the objective) of the experiment often confuses writers. The biggest misconception is that the purpose is the same as the hypothesis. Not quite. We’ll get to hypotheses in a minute, but basically they provide some indication of what you expect the experiment to show. The purpose is broader, and deals more with what you expect to gain through the experiment. In a professional setting, the hypothesis might have something to do with how cells react to a certain kind of genetic manipulation, but the purpose of the experiment is to learn more about potential cancer treatments. Undergraduate reports don’t often have this wide-ranging a goal, but you should still try to maintain the distinction between your hypothesis and your purpose. In a solubility experiment, for example, your hypothesis might talk about the relationship between temperature and the rate of solubility, but the purpose is probably to learn more about some specific scientific principle underlying the process of solubility.

For starters, most people say that you should write out your working hypothesis before you perform the experiment or study. Many beginning science students neglect to do so and find themselves struggling to remember precisely which variables were involved in the process or in what way the researchers felt that they were related. Write your hypothesis down as you develop it—you’ll be glad you did.

As for the form a hypothesis should take, it’s best not to be too fancy or complicated; an inventive style isn’t nearly so important as clarity here. There’s nothing wrong with beginning your hypothesis with the phrase, “It was hypothesized that . . .” Be as specific as you can about the relationship between the different objects of your study. In other words, explain that when term A changes, term B changes in this particular way. Readers of scientific writing are rarely content with the idea that a relationship between two terms exists—they want to know what that relationship entails.

Not a hypothesis:

“It was hypothesized that there is a significant relationship between the temperature of a solvent and the rate at which a solute dissolves.”

Hypothesis:

“It was hypothesized that as the temperature of a solvent increases, the rate at which a solute will dissolve in that solvent increases.”

Put more technically, most hypotheses contain both an independent and a dependent variable. The independent variable is what you manipulate to test the reaction; the dependent variable is what changes as a result of your manipulation. In the example above, the independent variable is the temperature of the solvent, and the dependent variable is the rate of solubility. Be sure that your hypothesis includes both variables.

Justify your hypothesis

You need to do more than tell your readers what your hypothesis is; you also need to assure them that this hypothesis was reasonable, given the circumstances. In other words, use the Introduction to explain that you didn’t just pluck your hypothesis out of thin air. (If you did pluck it out of thin air, your problems with your report will probably extend beyond using the appropriate format.) If you posit that a particular relationship exists between the independent and the dependent variable, what led you to believe your “guess” might be supported by evidence?

Scientists often refer to this type of justification as “motivating” the hypothesis, in the sense that something propelled them to make that prediction. Often, motivation includes what we already know—or rather, what scientists generally accept as true (see “Background/previous research” below). But you can also motivate your hypothesis by relying on logic or on your own observations. If you’re trying to decide which solutes will dissolve more rapidly in a solvent at increased temperatures, you might remember that some solids are meant to dissolve in hot water (e.g., bouillon cubes) and some are used for a function precisely because they withstand higher temperatures (they make saucepans out of something). Or you can think about whether you’ve noticed sugar dissolving more rapidly in your glass of iced tea or in your cup of coffee. Even such basic, outside-the-lab observations can help you justify your hypothesis as reasonable.

Background/previous research

This part of the Introduction demonstrates to the reader your awareness of how you’re building on other scientists’ work. If you think of the scientific community as engaging in a series of conversations about various topics, then you’ll recognize that the relevant background material will alert the reader to which conversation you want to enter.

Generally speaking, authors writing journal articles use the background for slightly different purposes than do students completing assignments. Because readers of academic journals tend to be professionals in the field, authors explain the background in order to permit readers to evaluate the study’s pertinence for their own work. You, on the other hand, write toward a much narrower audience—your peers in the course or your lab instructor—and so you must demonstrate that you understand the context for the (presumably assigned) experiment or study you’ve completed. For example, if your professor has been talking about polarity during lectures, and you’re doing a solubility experiment, you might try to connect the polarity of a solid to its relative solubility in certain solvents. In any event, both professional researchers and undergraduates need to connect the background material overtly to their own work.

Organization of this section

Most of the time, writers begin by stating the purpose or objectives of their own work, which establishes for the reader’s benefit the “nature and scope of the problem investigated” (Day 1994). Once you have expressed your purpose, you should then find it easier to move from the general purpose, to relevant material on the subject, to your hypothesis. In abbreviated form, an Introduction section might look like this:

“The purpose of the experiment was to test conventional ideas about solubility in the laboratory [purpose] . . . According to Whitecoat and Labrat (1999), at higher temperatures the molecules of solvents move more quickly . . . We know from the class lecture that molecules moving at higher rates of speed collide with one another more often and thus break down more easily [background material/motivation] . . . Thus, it was hypothesized that as the temperature of a solvent increases, the rate at which a solute will dissolve in that solvent increases [hypothesis].”

Again—these are guidelines, not commandments. Some writers and readers prefer different structures for the Introduction. The one above merely illustrates a common approach to organizing material.

How do I write a strong Materials and Methods section?

As with any piece of writing, your Methods section will succeed only if it fulfills its readers’ expectations, so you need to be clear in your own mind about the purpose of this section. Let’s review the purpose as we described it above: in this section, you want to describe in detail how you tested the hypothesis you developed and also to clarify the rationale for your procedure. In science, it’s not sufficient merely to design and carry out an experiment. Ultimately, others must be able to verify your findings, so your experiment must be reproducible, to the extent that other researchers can follow the same procedure and obtain the same (or similar) results.

Here’s a real-world example of the importance of reproducibility. In 1989, physicists Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischman announced that they had discovered “cold fusion,” a way of producing excess heat and power without the nuclear radiation that accompanies “hot fusion.” Such a discovery could have great ramifications for the industrial production of energy, so these findings created a great deal of interest. When other scientists tried to duplicate the experiment, however, they didn’t achieve the same results, and as a result many wrote off the conclusions as unjustified (or worse, a hoax). To this day, the viability of cold fusion is debated within the scientific community, even though an increasing number of researchers believe it possible. So when you write your Methods section, keep in mind that you need to describe your experiment well enough to allow others to replicate it exactly.

With these goals in mind, let’s consider how to write an effective Methods section in terms of content, structure, and style.

Sometimes the hardest thing about writing this section isn’t what you should talk about, but what you shouldn’t talk about. Writers often want to include the results of their experiment, because they measured and recorded the results during the course of the experiment. But such data should be reserved for the Results section. In the Methods section, you can write that you recorded the results, or how you recorded the results (e.g., in a table), but you shouldn’t write what the results were—not yet. Here, you’re merely stating exactly how you went about testing your hypothesis. As you draft your Methods section, ask yourself the following questions:

• How much detail? Be precise in providing details, but stay relevant. Ask yourself, “Would it make any difference if this piece were a different size or made from a different material?” If not, you probably don’t need to get too specific. If so, you should give as many details as necessary to prevent this experiment from going awry if someone else tries to carry it out. Probably the most crucial detail is measurement; you should always quantify anything you can, such as time elapsed, temperature, mass, volume, etc.
• Rationale: Be sure that as you’re relating your actions during the experiment, you explain your rationale for the protocol you developed. If you capped a test tube immediately after adding a solute to a solvent, why did you do that? (That’s really two questions: why did you cap it, and why did you cap it immediately?) In a professional setting, writers provide their rationale as a way to explain their thinking to potential critics. On one hand, of course, that’s your motivation for talking about protocol, too. On the other hand, since in practical terms you’re also writing to your teacher (who’s seeking to evaluate how well you comprehend the principles of the experiment), explaining the rationale indicates that you understand the reasons for conducting the experiment in that way, and that you’re not just following orders. Critical thinking is crucial—robots don’t make good scientists.
• Control: Most experiments will include a control, which is a means of comparing experimental results. (Sometimes you’ll need to have more than one control, depending on the number of hypotheses you want to test.) The control is exactly the same as the other items you’re testing, except that you don’t manipulate the independent variable-the condition you’re altering to check the effect on the dependent variable. For example, if you’re testing solubility rates at increased temperatures, your control would be a solution that you didn’t heat at all; that way, you’ll see how quickly the solute dissolves “naturally” (i.e., without manipulation), and you’ll have a point of reference against which to compare the solutions you did heat.

Describe the control in the Methods section. Two things are especially important in writing about the control: identify the control as a control, and explain what you’re controlling for. Here is an example:

“As a control for the temperature change, we placed the same amount of solute in the same amount of solvent, and let the solution stand for five minutes without heating it.”

Structure and style

Organization is especially important in the Methods section of a lab report because readers must understand your experimental procedure completely. Many writers are surprised by the difficulty of conveying what they did during the experiment, since after all they’re only reporting an event, but it’s often tricky to present this information in a coherent way. There’s a fairly standard structure you can use to guide you, and following the conventions for style can help clarify your points.

• Subsections: Occasionally, researchers use subsections to report their procedure when the following circumstances apply: 1) if they’ve used a great many materials; 2) if the procedure is unusually complicated; 3) if they’ve developed a procedure that won’t be familiar to many of their readers. Because these conditions rarely apply to the experiments you’ll perform in class, most undergraduate lab reports won’t require you to use subsections. In fact, many guides to writing lab reports suggest that you try to limit your Methods section to a single paragraph.
• Narrative structure: Think of this section as telling a story about a group of people and the experiment they performed. Describe what you did in the order in which you did it. You may have heard the old joke centered on the line, “Disconnect the red wire, but only after disconnecting the green wire,” where the person reading the directions blows everything to kingdom come because the directions weren’t in order. We’re used to reading about events chronologically, and so your readers will generally understand what you did if you present that information in the same way. Also, since the Methods section does generally appear as a narrative (story), you want to avoid the “recipe” approach: “First, take a clean, dry 100 ml test tube from the rack. Next, add 50 ml of distilled water.” You should be reporting what did happen, not telling the reader how to perform the experiment: “50 ml of distilled water was poured into a clean, dry 100 ml test tube.” Hint: most of the time, the recipe approach comes from copying down the steps of the procedure from your lab manual, so you may want to draft the Methods section initially without consulting your manual. Later, of course, you can go back and fill in any part of the procedure you inadvertently overlooked.
• Past tense: Remember that you’re describing what happened, so you should use past tense to refer to everything you did during the experiment. Writers are often tempted to use the imperative (“Add 5 g of the solid to the solution”) because that’s how their lab manuals are worded; less frequently, they use present tense (“5 g of the solid are added to the solution”). Instead, remember that you’re talking about an event which happened at a particular time in the past, and which has already ended by the time you start writing, so simple past tense will be appropriate in this section (“5 g of the solid were added to the solution” or “We added 5 g of the solid to the solution”).
• Active: We heated the solution to 80°C. (The subject, “we,” performs the action, heating.)
• Passive: The solution was heated to 80°C. (The subject, “solution,” doesn’t do the heating–it is acted upon, not acting.)

Increasingly, especially in the social sciences, using first person and active voice is acceptable in scientific reports. Most readers find that this style of writing conveys information more clearly and concisely. This rhetorical choice thus brings two scientific values into conflict: objectivity versus clarity. Since the scientific community hasn’t reached a consensus about which style it prefers, you may want to ask your lab instructor.

How do I write a strong Results section?

Here’s a paradox for you. The Results section is often both the shortest (yay!) and most important (uh-oh!) part of your report. Your Materials and Methods section shows how you obtained the results, and your Discussion section explores the significance of the results, so clearly the Results section forms the backbone of the lab report. This section provides the most critical information about your experiment: the data that allow you to discuss how your hypothesis was or wasn’t supported. But it doesn’t provide anything else, which explains why this section is generally shorter than the others.

Before you write this section, look at all the data you collected to figure out what relates significantly to your hypothesis. You’ll want to highlight this material in your Results section. Resist the urge to include every bit of data you collected, since perhaps not all are relevant. Also, don’t try to draw conclusions about the results—save them for the Discussion section. In this section, you’re reporting facts. Nothing your readers can dispute should appear in the Results section.

Most Results sections feature three distinct parts: text, tables, and figures. Let’s consider each part one at a time.

This should be a short paragraph, generally just a few lines, that describes the results you obtained from your experiment. In a relatively simple experiment, one that doesn’t produce a lot of data for you to repeat, the text can represent the entire Results section. Don’t feel that you need to include lots of extraneous detail to compensate for a short (but effective) text; your readers appreciate discrimination more than your ability to recite facts. In a more complex experiment, you may want to use tables and/or figures to help guide your readers toward the most important information you gathered. In that event, you’ll need to refer to each table or figure directly, where appropriate:

“Table 1 lists the rates of solubility for each substance”

“Solubility increased as the temperature of the solution increased (see Figure 1).”

If you do use tables or figures, make sure that you don’t present the same material in both the text and the tables/figures, since in essence you’ll just repeat yourself, probably annoying your readers with the redundancy of your statements.

Feel free to describe trends that emerge as you examine the data. Although identifying trends requires some judgment on your part and so may not feel like factual reporting, no one can deny that these trends do exist, and so they properly belong in the Results section. Example:

“Heating the solution increased the rate of solubility of polar solids by 45% but had no effect on the rate of solubility in solutions containing non-polar solids.”

This point isn’t debatable—you’re just pointing out what the data show.

As in the Materials and Methods section, you want to refer to your data in the past tense, because the events you recorded have already occurred and have finished occurring. In the example above, note the use of “increased” and “had,” rather than “increases” and “has.” (You don’t know from your experiment that heating always increases the solubility of polar solids, but it did that time.)

You shouldn’t put information in the table that also appears in the text. You also shouldn’t use a table to present irrelevant data, just to show you did collect these data during the experiment. Tables are good for some purposes and situations, but not others, so whether and how you’ll use tables depends upon what you need them to accomplish.

Tables are useful ways to show variation in data, but not to present a great deal of unchanging measurements. If you’re dealing with a scientific phenomenon that occurs only within a certain range of temperatures, for example, you don’t need to use a table to show that the phenomenon didn’t occur at any of the other temperatures. How useful is this table?

As you can probably see, no solubility was observed until the trial temperature reached 50°C, a fact that the text part of the Results section could easily convey. The table could then be limited to what happened at 50°C and higher, thus better illustrating the differences in solubility rates when solubility did occur.

As a rule, try not to use a table to describe any experimental event you can cover in one sentence of text. Here’s an example of an unnecessary table from How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper , by Robert A. Day:

As Day notes, all the information in this table can be summarized in one sentence: “S. griseus, S. coelicolor, S. everycolor, and S. rainbowenski grew under aerobic conditions, whereas S. nocolor and S. greenicus required anaerobic conditions.” Most readers won’t find the table clearer than that one sentence.

When you do have reason to tabulate material, pay attention to the clarity and readability of the format you use. Here are a few tips:

• Number your table. Then, when you refer to the table in the text, use that number to tell your readers which table they can review to clarify the material.
• Give your table a title. This title should be descriptive enough to communicate the contents of the table, but not so long that it becomes difficult to follow. The titles in the sample tables above are acceptable.
• Arrange your table so that readers read vertically, not horizontally. For the most part, this rule means that you should construct your table so that like elements read down, not across. Think about what you want your readers to compare, and put that information in the column (up and down) rather than in the row (across). Usually, the point of comparison will be the numerical data you collect, so especially make sure you have columns of numbers, not rows.Here’s an example of how drastically this decision affects the readability of your table (from A Short Guide to Writing about Chemistry , by Herbert Beall and John Trimbur). Look at this table, which presents the relevant data in horizontal rows:

It’s a little tough to see the trends that the author presumably wants to present in this table. Compare this table, in which the data appear vertically:

The second table shows how putting like elements in a vertical column makes for easier reading. In this case, the like elements are the measurements of length and height, over five trials–not, as in the first table, the length and height measurements for each trial.

• Make sure to include units of measurement in the tables. Readers might be able to guess that you measured something in millimeters, but don’t make them try.
• Don’t use vertical lines as part of the format for your table. This convention exists because journals prefer not to have to reproduce these lines because the tables then become more expensive to print. Even though it’s fairly unlikely that you’ll be sending your Biology 11 lab report to Science for publication, your readers still have this expectation. Consequently, if you use the table-drawing option in your word-processing software, choose the option that doesn’t rely on a “grid” format (which includes vertical lines).

How do I include figures in my report?

Although tables can be useful ways of showing trends in the results you obtained, figures (i.e., illustrations) can do an even better job of emphasizing such trends. Lab report writers often use graphic representations of the data they collected to provide their readers with a literal picture of how the experiment went.

When should you use a figure?

Remember the circumstances under which you don’t need a table: when you don’t have a great deal of data or when the data you have don’t vary a lot. Under the same conditions, you would probably forgo the figure as well, since the figure would be unlikely to provide your readers with an additional perspective. Scientists really don’t like their time wasted, so they tend not to respond favorably to redundancy.

If you’re trying to decide between using a table and creating a figure to present your material, consider the following a rule of thumb. The strength of a table lies in its ability to supply large amounts of exact data, whereas the strength of a figure is its dramatic illustration of important trends within the experiment. If you feel that your readers won’t get the full impact of the results you obtained just by looking at the numbers, then a figure might be appropriate.

Of course, an undergraduate class may expect you to create a figure for your lab experiment, if only to make sure that you can do so effectively. If this is the case, then don’t worry about whether to use figures or not—concentrate instead on how best to accomplish your task.

Figures can include maps, photographs, pen-and-ink drawings, flow charts, bar graphs, and section graphs (“pie charts”). But the most common figure by far, especially for undergraduates, is the line graph, so we’ll focus on that type in this handout.

At the undergraduate level, you can often draw and label your graphs by hand, provided that the result is clear, legible, and drawn to scale. Computer technology has, however, made creating line graphs a lot easier. Most word-processing software has a number of functions for transferring data into graph form; many scientists have found Microsoft Excel, for example, a helpful tool in graphing results. If you plan on pursuing a career in the sciences, it may be well worth your while to learn to use a similar program.

Computers can’t, however, decide for you how your graph really works; you have to know how to design your graph to meet your readers’ expectations. Here are some of these expectations:

• Keep it as simple as possible. You may be tempted to signal the complexity of the information you gathered by trying to design a graph that accounts for that complexity. But remember the purpose of your graph: to dramatize your results in a manner that’s easy to see and grasp. Try not to make the reader stare at the graph for a half hour to find the important line among the mass of other lines. For maximum effectiveness, limit yourself to three to five lines per graph; if you have more data to demonstrate, use a set of graphs to account for it, rather than trying to cram it all into a single figure.
• Plot the independent variable on the horizontal (x) axis and the dependent variable on the vertical (y) axis. Remember that the independent variable is the condition that you manipulated during the experiment and the dependent variable is the condition that you measured to see if it changed along with the independent variable. Placing the variables along their respective axes is mostly just a convention, but since your readers are accustomed to viewing graphs in this way, you’re better off not challenging the convention in your report.
• Label each axis carefully, and be especially careful to include units of measure. You need to make sure that your readers understand perfectly well what your graph indicates.
• Number and title your graphs. As with tables, the title of the graph should be informative but concise, and you should refer to your graph by number in the text (e.g., “Figure 1 shows the increase in the solubility rate as a function of temperature”).
• Many editors of professional scientific journals prefer that writers distinguish the lines in their graphs by attaching a symbol to them, usually a geometric shape (triangle, square, etc.), and using that symbol throughout the curve of the line. Generally, readers have a hard time distinguishing dotted lines from dot-dash lines from straight lines, so you should consider staying away from this system. Editors don’t usually like different-colored lines within a graph because colors are difficult and expensive to reproduce; colors may, however, be great for your purposes, as long as you’re not planning to submit your paper to Nature. Use your discretion—try to employ whichever technique dramatizes the results most effectively.
• Try to gather data at regular intervals, so the plot points on your graph aren’t too far apart. You can’t be sure of the arc you should draw between the plot points if the points are located at the far corners of the graph; over a fifteen-minute interval, perhaps the change occurred in the first or last thirty seconds of that period (in which case your straight-line connection between the points is misleading).
• If you’re worried that you didn’t collect data at sufficiently regular intervals during your experiment, go ahead and connect the points with a straight line, but you may want to examine this problem as part of your Discussion section.
• Make your graph large enough so that everything is legible and clearly demarcated, but not so large that it either overwhelms the rest of the Results section or provides a far greater range than you need to illustrate your point. If, for example, the seedlings of your plant grew only 15 mm during the trial, you don’t need to construct a graph that accounts for 100 mm of growth. The lines in your graph should more or less fill the space created by the axes; if you see that your data is confined to the lower left portion of the graph, you should probably re-adjust your scale.
• If you create a set of graphs, make them the same size and format, including all the verbal and visual codes (captions, symbols, scale, etc.). You want to be as consistent as possible in your illustrations, so that your readers can easily make the comparisons you’re trying to get them to see.

How do I write a strong Discussion section?

The discussion section is probably the least formalized part of the report, in that you can’t really apply the same structure to every type of experiment. In simple terms, here you tell your readers what to make of the Results you obtained. If you have done the Results part well, your readers should already recognize the trends in the data and have a fairly clear idea of whether your hypothesis was supported. Because the Results can seem so self-explanatory, many students find it difficult to know what material to add in this last section.

Basically, the Discussion contains several parts, in no particular order, but roughly moving from specific (i.e., related to your experiment only) to general (how your findings fit in the larger scientific community). In this section, you will, as a rule, need to:

Explain whether the data support your hypothesis

• Acknowledge any anomalous data or deviations from what you expected

Derive conclusions, based on your findings, about the process you’re studying

• Relate your findings to earlier work in the same area (if you can)

Explore the theoretical and/or practical implications of your findings

Let’s look at some dos and don’ts for each of these objectives.

This statement is usually a good way to begin the Discussion, since you can’t effectively speak about the larger scientific value of your study until you’ve figured out the particulars of this experiment. You might begin this part of the Discussion by explicitly stating the relationships or correlations your data indicate between the independent and dependent variables. Then you can show more clearly why you believe your hypothesis was or was not supported. For example, if you tested solubility at various temperatures, you could start this section by noting that the rates of solubility increased as the temperature increased. If your initial hypothesis surmised that temperature change would not affect solubility, you would then say something like,

“The hypothesis that temperature change would not affect solubility was not supported by the data.”

Note: Students tend to view labs as practical tests of undeniable scientific truths. As a result, you may want to say that the hypothesis was “proved” or “disproved” or that it was “correct” or “incorrect.” These terms, however, reflect a degree of certainty that you as a scientist aren’t supposed to have. Remember, you’re testing a theory with a procedure that lasts only a few hours and relies on only a few trials, which severely compromises your ability to be sure about the “truth” you see. Words like “supported,” “indicated,” and “suggested” are more acceptable ways to evaluate your hypothesis.

Also, recognize that saying whether the data supported your hypothesis or not involves making a claim to be defended. As such, you need to show the readers that this claim is warranted by the evidence. Make sure that you’re very explicit about the relationship between the evidence and the conclusions you draw from it. This process is difficult for many writers because we don’t often justify conclusions in our regular lives. For example, you might nudge your friend at a party and whisper, “That guy’s drunk,” and once your friend lays eyes on the person in question, she might readily agree. In a scientific paper, by contrast, you would need to defend your claim more thoroughly by pointing to data such as slurred words, unsteady gait, and the lampshade-as-hat. In addition to pointing out these details, you would also need to show how (according to previous studies) these signs are consistent with inebriation, especially if they occur in conjunction with one another. To put it another way, tell your readers exactly how you got from point A (was the hypothesis supported?) to point B (yes/no).

Acknowledge any anomalous data, or deviations from what you expected

You need to take these exceptions and divergences into account, so that you qualify your conclusions sufficiently. For obvious reasons, your readers will doubt your authority if you (deliberately or inadvertently) overlook a key piece of data that doesn’t square with your perspective on what occurred. In a more philosophical sense, once you’ve ignored evidence that contradicts your claims, you’ve departed from the scientific method. The urge to “tidy up” the experiment is often strong, but if you give in to it you’re no longer performing good science.

Sometimes after you’ve performed a study or experiment, you realize that some part of the methods you used to test your hypothesis was flawed. In that case, it’s OK to suggest that if you had the chance to conduct your test again, you might change the design in this or that specific way in order to avoid such and such a problem. The key to making this approach work, though, is to be very precise about the weakness in your experiment, why and how you think that weakness might have affected your data, and how you would alter your protocol to eliminate—or limit the effects of—that weakness. Often, inexperienced researchers and writers feel the need to account for “wrong” data (remember, there’s no such animal), and so they speculate wildly about what might have screwed things up. These speculations include such factors as the unusually hot temperature in the room, or the possibility that their lab partners read the meters wrong, or the potentially defective equipment. These explanations are what scientists call “cop-outs,” or “lame”; don’t indicate that the experiment had a weakness unless you’re fairly certain that a) it really occurred and b) you can explain reasonably well how that weakness affected your results.

If, for example, your hypothesis dealt with the changes in solubility at different temperatures, then try to figure out what you can rationally say about the process of solubility more generally. If you’re doing an undergraduate lab, chances are that the lab will connect in some way to the material you’ve been covering either in lecture or in your reading, so you might choose to return to these resources as a way to help you think clearly about the process as a whole.

This part of the Discussion section is another place where you need to make sure that you’re not overreaching. Again, nothing you’ve found in one study would remotely allow you to claim that you now “know” something, or that something isn’t “true,” or that your experiment “confirmed” some principle or other. Hesitate before you go out on a limb—it’s dangerous! Use less absolutely conclusive language, including such words as “suggest,” “indicate,” “correspond,” “possibly,” “challenge,” etc.

Relate your findings to previous work in the field (if possible)

We’ve been talking about how to show that you belong in a particular community (such as biologists or anthropologists) by writing within conventions that they recognize and accept. Another is to try to identify a conversation going on among members of that community, and use your work to contribute to that conversation. In a larger philosophical sense, scientists can’t fully understand the value of their research unless they have some sense of the context that provoked and nourished it. That is, you have to recognize what’s new about your project (potentially, anyway) and how it benefits the wider body of scientific knowledge. On a more pragmatic level, especially for undergraduates, connecting your lab work to previous research will demonstrate to the TA that you see the big picture. You have an opportunity, in the Discussion section, to distinguish yourself from the students in your class who aren’t thinking beyond the barest facts of the study. Capitalize on this opportunity by putting your own work in context.

If you’re just beginning to work in the natural sciences (as a first-year biology or chemistry student, say), most likely the work you’ll be doing has already been performed and re-performed to a satisfactory degree. Hence, you could probably point to a similar experiment or study and compare/contrast your results and conclusions. More advanced work may deal with an issue that is somewhat less “resolved,” and so previous research may take the form of an ongoing debate, and you can use your own work to weigh in on that debate. If, for example, researchers are hotly disputing the value of herbal remedies for the common cold, and the results of your study suggest that Echinacea diminishes the symptoms but not the actual presence of the cold, then you might want to take some time in the Discussion section to recapitulate the specifics of the dispute as it relates to Echinacea as an herbal remedy. (Consider that you have probably already written in the Introduction about this debate as background research.)

This information is often the best way to end your Discussion (and, for all intents and purposes, the report). In argumentative writing generally, you want to use your closing words to convey the main point of your writing. This main point can be primarily theoretical (“Now that you understand this information, you’re in a better position to understand this larger issue”) or primarily practical (“You can use this information to take such and such an action”). In either case, the concluding statements help the reader to comprehend the significance of your project and your decision to write about it.

Since a lab report is argumentative—after all, you’re investigating a claim, and judging the legitimacy of that claim by generating and collecting evidence—it’s often a good idea to end your report with the same technique for establishing your main point. If you want to go the theoretical route, you might talk about the consequences your study has for the field or phenomenon you’re investigating. To return to the examples regarding solubility, you could end by reflecting on what your work on solubility as a function of temperature tells us (potentially) about solubility in general. (Some folks consider this type of exploration “pure” as opposed to “applied” science, although these labels can be problematic.) If you want to go the practical route, you could end by speculating about the medical, institutional, or commercial implications of your findings—in other words, answer the question, “What can this study help people to do?” In either case, you’re going to make your readers’ experience more satisfying, by helping them see why they spent their time learning what you had to teach them.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

American Psychological Association. 2010. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association . 6th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Beall, Herbert, and John Trimbur. 2001. A Short Guide to Writing About Chemistry , 2nd ed. New York: Longman.

Blum, Deborah, and Mary Knudson. 1997. A Field Guide for Science Writers: The Official Guide of the National Association of Science Writers . New York: Oxford University Press.

Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, Joseph Bizup, and William T. FitzGerald. 2016. The Craft of Research , 4th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Briscoe, Mary Helen. 1996. Preparing Scientific Illustrations: A Guide to Better Posters, Presentations, and Publications , 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Council of Science Editors. 2014. Scientific Style and Format: The CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers , 8th ed. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.

Davis, Martha. 2012. Scientific Papers and Presentations , 3rd ed. London: Academic Press.

Day, Robert A. 1994. How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper , 4th ed. Phoenix: Oryx Press.

Porush, David. 1995. A Short Guide to Writing About Science . New York: Longman.

Williams, Joseph, and Joseph Bizup. 2017. Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace , 12th ed. Boston: Pearson.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Common Writing Assignments

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

These OWL resources will help you understand and complete specific types of writing assignments, such as annotated bibliographies, book reports, and research papers. This section also includes resources on writing academic proposals for conference presentations, journal articles, and books.

Understanding Writing Assignments

This resource describes some steps you can take to better understand the requirements of your writing assignments. This resource works for either in-class, teacher-led discussion or for personal use.

Argument Papers

This resource outlines the generally accepted structure for introductions, body paragraphs, and conclusions in an academic argument paper. Keep in mind that this resource contains guidelines and not strict rules about organization. Your structure needs to be flexible enough to meet the requirements of your purpose and audience.

Research Papers

This handout provides detailed information about how to write research papers including discussing research papers as a genre, choosing topics, and finding sources.

Exploratory Papers

This resource will help you with exploratory/inquiry essay assignments.

Annotated Bibliographies

This handout provides information about annotated bibliographies in MLA, APA, and CMS.

Book Report

This resource discusses book reports and how to write them.

Definitions

This handout provides suggestions and examples for writing definitions.

Essays for Exams

While most OWL resources recommend a longer writing process (start early, revise often, conduct thorough research, etc.), sometimes you just have to write quickly in test situations. However, these exam essays can be no less important pieces of writing than research papers because they can influence final grades for courses, and/or they can mean the difference between getting into an academic program (GED, SAT, GRE). To that end, this resource will help you prepare and write essays for exams.

Book Review

This resource discusses book reviews and how to write them.

Academic Proposals

This resource will help undergraduate, graduate, and professional scholars write proposals for academic conferences, articles, and books.

In this section

Subsections.

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

The purpose of a field report in the social sciences is to describe the deliberate observation of people, places, and/or events and to analyze what has been observed in order to identify and categorize common themes in relation to the research problem underpinning the study. The content represents the researcher's interpretation of meaning found in data that has been gathered during one or more observational events.

Flick, Uwe. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection . London: SAGE Publications, 2018; Lofland, John, David Snow, Leon Anderson, and Lyn H. Lofland. Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, 2022; Baker, Lynda. "Observation: A Complex Research Method." Library Trends 55 (Summer 2006): 171-189.; Kellehear, Allan. The Unobtrusive Researcher: A Guide to Methods . New York: Routledge, 2020.

How to Approach Writing a Field Report

How to Begin

Field reports are most often assigned in disciplines of the applied social sciences [e.g., social work, anthropology, gerontology, criminal justice, education, law, the health care services] where it is important to build a bridge of relevancy between the theoretical concepts learned in the classroom and the practice of actually doing the work you are being taught to do. Field reports are also common in certain science disciplines [e.g., geology] but these reports are organized differently and serve a different purpose than what is described below.

Professors will assign a field report with the intention of improving your understanding of key theoretical concepts by applying methods of careful and structured observation of, and reflection about, people, places, or phenomena existing in their natural settings. Field reports facilitate the development of data collection techniques and observation skills and they help you to understand how theory applies to real world situations. Field reports are also an opportunity to obtain evidence through methods of observing professional practice that contribute to or challenge existing theories.

We are all observers of people, their interactions, places, and events; however, your responsibility when writing a field report is to conduct research based on data generated by the act of designing a specific study, deliberate observation, synthesis of key findings, and interpretation of their meaning.

When writing a field report you need to:

• Systematically observe and accurately record the varying aspects of a situation . Always approach your field study with a detailed protocol about what you will observe, where you should conduct your observations, and the method by which you will collect and record your data.
• Continuously analyze your observations . Always look for the meaning underlying the actions you observe. Ask yourself: What's going on here? What does this observed activity mean? What else does this relate to? Note that this is an on-going process of reflection and analysis taking place for the duration of your field research.
• Keep the report’s aims in mind while you are observing . Recording what you observe should not be done randomly or haphazardly; you must be focused and pay attention to details. Enter the observation site [i.e., "field"] with a clear plan about what you are intending to observe and record in relation to the research problem while, at the same time, being prepared to adapt to changing circumstances as they may arise.
• Consciously observe, record, and analyze what you hear and see in the context of a theoretical framework . This is what separates data gatherings from reporting. The theoretical framework guiding your field research should determine what, when, and how you observe and act as the foundation from which you interpret your findings in relation to the underlying assumptions embedded in the theoretical framework .

Techniques to Record Your Observations Although there is no limit to the type of data gathering techniques you can use, these are the most frequently used methods:

Note Taking This is the most common and easiest method of recording your observations. Tips for taking notes include: organizing some shorthand symbols beforehand so that recording basic or repeated actions does not impede your ability to observe, using many small paragraphs, which reflect changes in activities, who is talking, etc., and, leaving space on the page so you can write down additional thoughts and ideas about what’s being observed, any theoretical insights, and notes to yourself that are set aside for further investigation. See drop-down tab for additional information about note-taking.

Photography With the advent of smart phones, an almost unlimited number of high quality photographs can be taken of the objects, events, and people observed during a field study. Photographs can help capture an important moment in time as well as document details about the space where your observation takes place. Taking a photograph can save you time in documenting the details of a space that would otherwise require extensive note taking. However, be aware that flash photography could undermine your ability to observe unobtrusively so assess the lighting in your observation space; if it's too dark, you may need to rely on taking notes. Also, you should reject the idea that photographs represent some sort of "window into the world" because this assumption creates the risk of over-interpreting what they show. As with any product of data gathering, you are the sole instrument of interpretation and meaning-making, not the object itself. Video and Audio Recordings Video or audio recording your observations has the positive effect of giving you an unfiltered record of the observation event. It also facilitates repeated analysis of your observations. This can be particularly helpful as you gather additional information or insights during your research. However, these techniques have the negative effect of increasing how intrusive you are as an observer and will often not be practical or even allowed under certain circumstances [e.g., interaction between a doctor and a patient] and in certain organizational settings [e.g., a courtroom]. Illustrations/Drawings This does not refer to an artistic endeavor but, rather, refers to the possible need, for example, to draw a map of the observation setting or illustrating objects in relation to people's behavior. This can also take the form of rough tables, charts, or graphs documenting the frequency and type of activities observed. These can be subsequently placed in a more readable format when you write your field report. To save time, draft a table [i.e., columns and rows] on a separate piece of paper before an observation if you know you will be entering data in that way.

NOTE:   You may consider using a laptop or other electronic device to record your notes as you observe, but keep in mind the possibility that the clicking of keys while you type or noises from your device can be obtrusive, whereas writing your notes on paper is relatively quiet and unobtrusive. Always assess your presence in the setting where you're gathering the data so as to minimize your impact on the subject or phenomenon being studied.

ANOTHER NOTE:   Techniques of deliberate observation and data gathering are not innate skills; they are skills that must be learned and practiced in order to achieve proficiency. Before your first observation, practice the technique you plan to use in a setting similar to your study site [e.g., take notes about how people choose to enter checkout lines at a grocery store if your research involves examining the choice patterns of unrelated people forced to queue in busy social settings]. When the act of data gathering counts, you'll be glad you practiced beforehand.

YET ANOTHER NOTE:   An issue rarely discussed in the literature about conducting field research is whether you should move around the study site while observing or remaining situated in one place. Moving around can be intrusive, but it facilitates observing people's behavior from multiple vectors. However, if you remain in one place throughout the observation [or during each observation], you will eventually blend into the background and diminish the chance of unintentionally influencing people's behavior. If the site has a complex set of interactions or interdependent activities [e.g., a play ground], consider moving around; if the study site is relatively fixed [e.g., a classroom], then consider staying in one place while observing.

Examples of Things to Document While Observing

• Physical setting . The characteristics of an occupied space and the human use of the place where the observation(s) are being conducted.
• Objects and material culture . This refers to the presence, placement, and arrangement of objects that impact the behavior or actions of those being observed. If applicable, describe the cultural artifacts representing the beliefs [i.e., the values, ideas, attitudes, and assumptions] of the individuals you are observing [e.g., the choice of particular types of clothing in the observation of family gatherings during culturally specific holidays].
• Use of language . Don't just observe but  listen to what is being said, how is it being said, and the tone of conversations among participants.
• Behavior cycles . This refers to documenting when and who performs what behavior or task and how often they occur. Record at which stage this behavior is occurring within the setting.
• The order in which events unfold . Note sequential patterns of behavior or the moment when actions or events take place and their significance. Also, be prepared to note moments that diverge from these sequential patterns of behavior or actions.
• Physical characteristics of subjects. If relevant, document personal characteristics of individuals being observed. Note that, unless this data can be verified in interviews or from documentary evidence, you should only focus on characteristics that can be clearly observed [e.g., clothing, physical appearance, body language].
• Expressive body movements . This would include things like body posture or facial expressions. Note that it may be relevant to also assess whether expressive body movements support or contradict the language used in conversation [e.g., detecting sarcasm].

Brief notes about all of these examples contextualize your observations; however, your observation notes will be guided primarily by your theoretical framework, keeping in mind that your observations will feed into and potentially modify or alter these frameworks.

Sampling Techniques

Sampling refers to the process used to select a portion of the population for study . Qualitative research, of which observation is one method of data gathering, is generally based on non-probability and purposive sampling rather than probability or random approaches characteristic of quantitatively-driven studies. Sampling in observational research is flexible and often continues until no new themes emerge from the data, a point referred to as data saturation.

All sampling decisions are made for the explicit purpose of obtaining the richest possible source of information to answer the research questions. Decisions about sampling assumes you know what you want to observe, what behaviors are important to record, and what research problem you are addressing before you begin the study. These questions determine what sampling technique you should use, so be sure you have adequately answered them before selecting a sampling method.

Ways to sample when conducting an observation include:

• Ad Libitum Sampling -- this approach is not that different from what people do at the zoo; they observe whatever seems interesting at the moment. There is no organized system of recording the observations; you just note whatever seems relevant at the time. The advantage of this method is that you are often able to observe relatively rare or unusual behaviors that might be missed by more deliberately designed sampling methods. This method is also useful for obtaining preliminary observations that can be used to develop your final field study. Problems using this method include the possibility of inherent bias toward conspicuous behaviors or individuals, thereby missing mundane or repeated patterns of behavior, and that you may miss brief interactions in social settings.
• Behavior Sampling -- this involves watching the entire group of subjects and recording each occurrence of a specific behavior of interest and with reference to which individuals were involved. The method is useful in recording rare behaviors missed by other sampling methods and is often used in conjunction with focal or scan methods [see below]. However, sampling can be biased towards particular conspicuous behaviors.
• Continuous Recording -- provides a faithful record of behavior including frequencies, durations, and latencies [the time that elapses between a stimulus and the response to it]. This is a very demanding method because you are trying to record everything within the setting and, thus, measuring reliability may be sacrificed. In addition, durations and latencies are only reliable if subjects remain present throughout the collection of data. However, this method facilitates analyzing sequences of behaviors and ensures obtaining a wealth of data about the observation site and the people within it. The use of audio or video recording is most useful with this type of sampling.
• Focal Sampling -- this involves observing one individual for a specified amount of time and recording all instances of that individual's behavior. Usually you have a set of predetermined categories or types of behaviors that you are interested in observing [e.g., when a teacher walks around the classroom] and you keep track of the duration of those behaviors. This approach doesn't tend to bias one behavior over another and provides significant detail about a individual's behavior. However, with this method, you likely have to conduct a lot of focal samples before you have a good idea about how group members interact. It can also be difficult within certain settings to keep one individual in sight for the entire period of the observation without being intrusive.
• Instantaneous Sampling -- this is where observation sessions are divided into short intervals divided by sample points. At each sample point the observer records if predetermined behaviors of interest are taking place. This method is not effective for recording discrete events of short duration and, frequently, observers will want to record novel behaviors that occur slightly before or after the point of sampling, creating a sampling error. Though not exact, this method does give you an idea of durations and is relatively easy to do. It is also good for recording behavior patterns occurring at a specific instant, such as, movement or body positions.
• One-Zero Sampling -- this is very similar to instantaneous sampling, only the observer records if the behaviors of interest have occurred at any time during an interval instead of at the instant of the sampling point. The method is useful for capturing data on behavior patterns that start and stop repeatedly and rapidly, but that last only for a brief period of time. The disadvantage of this approach is that you get a dimensionless score for an entire recording session, so you only get one one data point for each recording session.
• Scan Sampling -- this method involves taking a census of the entire observed group at predetermined time periods and recording what each individual is doing at that moment. This is useful for obtaining group behavioral data and allows for data that are evenly representative across individuals and periods of time. On the other hand, this method may be biased towards more conspicuous behaviors and you may miss a lot of what is going on between observations, especially rare or unusual behaviors. It is also difficult to record more than a few individuals in a group setting without missing what each individual is doing at each predetermined moment in time [e.g., children sitting at a table during lunch at school]. The use of audio or video recording is useful with this type of sampling.

Alderks, Peter. Data Collection. Psychology 330 Course Documents. Animal Behavior Lab. University of Washington; Emerson, Robert M. Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and Formulations . 2nd ed. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 2001; Emerson, Robert M. et al. “Participant Observation and Fieldnotes.” In Handbook of Ethnography . Paul Atkinson et al., eds. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001), 352-368; Emerson, Robert M. et al. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes . 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2011; Ethnography, Observational Research, and Narrative Inquiry. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Hazel, Spencer. "The Paradox from Within: Research Participants Doing-Being-Observed." Qualitative Research 16 (August 2016): 446-457; Pace, Tonio. Writing Field Reports. Scribd Online Library; Presser, Jon and Dona Schwartz. “Photographs within the Sociological Research Process.” In Image-based Research: A Sourcebook for Qualitative Researchers . Jon Prosser, editor (London: Falmer Press, 1998), pp. 115-130; Pyrczak, Fred and Randall R. Bruce. Writing Empirical Research Reports: A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . 5th ed. Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing, 2005; Report Writing. UniLearning. University of Wollongong, Australia; Wolfinger, Nicholas H. "On Writing Fieldnotes: Collection Strategies and Background Expectancies.” Qualitative Research 2 (April 2002): 85-95; Writing Reports. Anonymous. The Higher Education Academy.

Structure and Writing Style

How you choose to format your field report is determined by the research problem, the theoretical framework that is driving your analysis, the observations that you make, and/or specific guidelines established by your professor. Since field reports do not have a standard format, it is worthwhile to determine from your professor what the preferred structure and organization should be before you begin to write. Note that field reports should be written in the past tense. With this in mind, most field reports in the social sciences include the following elements:

I.  Introduction The introduction should describe the research problem, the specific objectives of your research, and the important theories or concepts underpinning your field study. The introduction should describe the nature of the organization or setting where you are conducting the observation, what type of observations you have conducted, what your focus was, when you observed, and the methods you used for collecting the data. Collectively, this descriptive information should support reasons why you chose the observation site and the people or events within it. You should also include a review of pertinent literature related to the research problem, particularly if similar methods were used in prior studies. Conclude your introduction with a statement about how the rest of the paper is organized.

II.  Description of Activities

Your readers only knowledge and understanding of what happened will come from the description section of your report because they were not witnesses to the situation, people, or events that you are writing about. Given this, it is crucial that you provide sufficient details to place the analysis that will follow into proper context; don't make the mistake of providing a description without context. The description section of a field report is similar to a well written piece of journalism. Therefore, a useful approach to systematically describing the varying aspects of an observed situation is to answer the "Five W’s of Investigative Reporting." As Dubbels notes [p. 19], these are:

• What -- describe what you observed. Note the temporal, physical, and social boundaries you imposed to limit the observations you made. What were your general impressions of the situation you were observing. For example, as a student teacher, what is your impression of the application of iPads as a learning device in a history class; as a cultural anthropologist, what is your impression of women's participation in a Native American religious ritual?
• Where -- provide background information about the setting of your observation and, if necessary, note important material objects that are present that help contextualize the observation [e.g., arrangement of computers in relation to student engagement with the teacher].
• When -- record factual data about the day and the beginning and ending time of each observation. Note that it may also be necessary to include background information or key events which impact upon the situation you were observing [e.g., observing the ability of teachers to re-engage students after coming back from an unannounced fire drill].
• Who -- note background and demographic information about the individuals being observed e.g., age, gender, ethnicity, and/or any other variables relevant to your study]. Record who is doing what and saying what, as well as, who is not doing or saying what. If relevant, be sure to record who was missing from the observation.
• Why -- why were you doing this? Describe the reasons for selecting particular situations to observe. Note why something happened. Also note why you may have included or excluded certain information.

III.  Interpretation and Analysis

Always place the analysis and interpretations of your field observations within the larger context of the theoretical assumptions and issues you described in the introduction. Part of your responsibility in analyzing the data is to determine which observations are worthy of comment and interpretation, and which observations are more general in nature. It is your theoretical framework that allows you to make these decisions. You need to demonstrate to the reader that you are conducting the field work through the eyes of an informed viewer and from the perspective of a casual observer.

Here are some questions to ask yourself when analyzing your observations:

• What is the meaning of what you have observed?
• Why do you think what you observed happened? What evidence do you have for your reasoning?
• What events or behaviors were typical or widespread? If appropriate, what was unusual or out of the ordinary? How were they distributed among categories of people?
• Do you see any connections or patterns in what you observed?
• Why did the people you observed proceed with an action in the way that they did? What are the implications of this?
• Did the stated or implicit objectives of what you were observing match what was achieved?
• What were the relative merits of the behaviors you observed?
• What were the strengths and weaknesses of the observations you recorded?
• Do you see connections between what you observed and the findings of similar studies identified from your review of the literature?
• How do your observations fit into the larger context of professional practice? In what ways have your observations possibly changed or affirmed your perceptions of professional practice?
• Have you learned anything from what you observed?

NOTE:   Only base your interpretations on what you have actually observed. Do not speculate or manipulate your observational data to fit into your study's theoretical framework.

IV.  Conclusion and Recommendations

The conclusion should briefly recap of the entire study, reiterating the importance or significance of your observations. Avoid including any new information. You should also state any recommendations you may have based on the results of your study. Be sure to describe any unanticipated problems you encountered and note the limitations of your study. The conclusion should not be more than two or three paragraphs.

V.  Appendix

This is where you would place information that is not essential to explaining your findings, but that supports your analysis [especially repetitive or lengthy information], that validates your conclusions, or that contextualizes a related point that helps the reader understand the overall report. Examples of information that could be included in an appendix are figures/tables/charts/graphs of results, statistics, pictures, maps, drawings, or, if applicable, transcripts of interviews. There is no limit to what can be included in the appendix or its format [e.g., a DVD recording of the observation site], provided that it is relevant to the study's purpose and reference is made to it in the report. If information is placed in more than one appendix ["appendices"], the order in which they are organized is dictated by the order they were first mentioned in the text of the report.

VI.  References

List all sources that you consulted and obtained information from while writing your field report. Note that field reports generally do not include further readings or an extended bibliography. However, consult with your professor concerning what your list of sources should be included and be sure to write them in the preferred citation style of your discipline or is preferred by your professor [i.e., APA, Chicago, MLA, etc.].

Alderks, Peter. Data Collection. Psychology 330 Course Documents. Animal Behavior Lab. University of Washington; Dubbels, Brock R. Exploring the Cognitive, Social, Cultural, and Psychological Aspects of Gaming and Simulations . Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2018; Emerson, Robert M. Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and Formulations . 2nd ed. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 2001; Emerson, Robert M. et al. “Participant Observation and Fieldnotes.” In Handbook of Ethnography . Paul Atkinson et al., eds. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001), 352-368; Emerson, Robert M. et al. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes . 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2011; Ethnography, Observational Research, and Narrative Inquiry. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Pace, Tonio. Writing Field Reports. Scribd Online Library; Pyrczak, Fred and Randall R. Bruce. Writing Empirical Research Reports: A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . 5th ed. Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing, 2005; Report Writing. UniLearning. University of Wollongong, Australia; Wolfinger, Nicholas H. "On Writing Fieldnotes: Collection Strategies and Background Expectancies.” Qualitative Research 2 (April 2002): 85-95; Writing Reports. Anonymous. The Higher Education Academy.

• << Previous: Writing a Case Study
• Next: About Informed Consent >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 9:45 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 15 May 2024

Configurational impact of self-regulated writing strategy, writing anxiety, and perceived writing difficulty on EFL writing performance: an fsQCA approach

• Cunying Fan 1 &
• Juan Wang 1  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  11125 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Risk factors

Previous research has indicated that writing performance of foreign/second language (L2) learners is influenced by their utilization of self-regulated writing strategies. Yet, the relationship between various self-regulated strategies and individual characteristics, such as writing anxiety and perceived writing difficulty, has not been sufficiently examined. To bridge this gap, this study classified self-regulated writing strategies into four distinct types: cognitive, metacognitive, social behavioral, and motivational. These types were combined with L2 learners’ writing anxiety and writing difficulty to form conceptual models to predict high or low writing performance. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) was used to gain a detailed understanding of the causal intricacies of writing performance. Data was collected from a sample of 94 students attending a university in eastern China. fsQCA revealed a variety of configurations associated with EFL writing performance, with six of them leading to high performance and four to low performance. These configurations highlight the complex causal relationship between students’ use of self-regulated writing strategies and their writing performance, while considering their writing anxiety and perceived writing difficulty. The study provided theoretical and practical implications for L2 teachers and educators who wish to enhance L2 learners’ writing performance.

Similar content being viewed by others

Examining the impact of the number of sources on students’ writing performance and self-efficacy beliefs

An integrated model exploring the relationship between self-efficacy, technology integration via Blackboard, English proficiency, and Saudi EFL students’ academic achievement

Studying the effect of self-selected background music on reading task with eye movements

Introduction.

In our globalized world, English’s role as the primary language for international communication has rendered English writing skills increasingly important, particularly in non-English-speaking countries like China. However, writing in English poses notable challenges for EFL learners 1 . These challenges arise partly because writing requires the recollection of information from memory, the organization of thoughts, the transformation of ideas into linguistic forms, the employment of writing instruments to articulate these ideas on paper, and the revision of the text to produce a polished and coherent final product 2 . Furthermore, research on Chinese university students shows that their performance in English writing is frequently hampered by encountered difficulties, experienced anxiety, and challenges in effectively regulating their writing 3 , 4 , underscoring the importance of a comprehensive understanding of the factors impacting their writing performance.

Self-regulated learning (SRL) involves individuals actively and deliberately taking charge of their learning processes. Self-regulated learners plan, monitor, and manage cognitive, motivational, emotional, and behavioral aspects of learning to gain knowledge and acquire skills 5 , 6 . Applying SRL to writing involves a strategic approach where learners proactively set writing goals, employ and monitor suitable writing strategies, and engage in reflective practices to evaluate and improve their writing. This method helps in effectively managing writing-related challenges such as anxiety and perceived difficulties, thereby enhancing overall writing performance. SRL in writing encapsulates a holistic process of planning, executing, and revising, fostering a more competent and confident approach to writing tasks.

Research has shown that self-regulated writing strategies can be beneficial in enhancing writing proficiency 7 , 8 . Students who implement these strategies tend to have better writing performance and higher self-efficacy 9 , 10 . Writing anxiety is an emotional, mental, or behavioural impediment to a writing task which leaners are cognitively capable of completing 11 . If learners suffer from writing anxiety, they may focus more on the details than the flow of the text, leading to mistakes and a lack of sincerity in the writing 12 and are inversely related to writing performance 13 . Learners’ perception of writing difficulty is shaped by their proficiency and affective factors along with the complexity of the task they are assigned 14 . This is related to how much cognitive resources is required to successfully complete the task 15 , which ultimately affects their writing performance. Previous research has explored the individual effects of self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, and writing difficulty on writing performance, but none have provided a comprehensive insight into the intricate relationship between them. This study employs fsQCA to investigate how students’ self-regulated writing strategies, along with the interrelated variables of writing anxiety and writing difficulty, collectively and configurationally influence their writing performance.

In this study, we utilize fsQCA, a configurational approach, to explore the complexities of the writing process. The term “configuration” here refers to the unique combination and interplay of various factors—self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, writing difficulty, and EFL writing performance—within a complex system. Opting for fsQCA enables us to examine the non-linear interactions and cumulative effects of continuous variables 16 , thereby extending our analysis beyond conventional linear methodologies. Our goal with fsQCA is to reveal how different configurations of these factors influence EFL learners’ writing performance, offering an in-depth understanding of the intricate and multifaceted nature of the writing process.

This study enriches the EFL writing literature by utilizing fsQCA within the framework of self-regulated learning. It constructs and validates an intricate model to identify the determinants of high or low writing performance. This approach enables an in-depth examination of the interplay among key factors such as self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, and writing difficulty. Our analysis of these factors’ configurations advances a non-linear and comprehensive understanding of writing performance. The insights gained from this study are invaluable, offering researchers and educators new perspectives to effectively tackle the diverse and complex challenges prevalent in EFL writing education.

Literature review and research model

Self-regulated learning.

SRL is a process where individuals actively manage their own learning. This involves not only focusing on acquiring knowledge and skills but also managing cognitive, motivational, emotional, and behavioral aspects 5 , 6 . Self-regulated learners set goals, strategize, and reflect on their learning, believing that strategic application of these skills enhances academic achievement 17 . However, many students face challenges in effectively self-regulating their learning due to the complex and demanding nature of this process, potentially leading to cognitive overload 18 .

Incorporating SRL into the context of writing, particularly for addressing the challenges like writing anxiety, perceived writing difficulties, and writing performance, involves learners actively engaging in the SRL cycle to enhance their writing skills. This includes setting clear goals for writing tasks (forethought phase), employing and monitoring effective writing strategies (performance phase), and reflecting on the writing process to identify areas for improvement (self-reflection phase). By doing so, learners can manage their cognitive and emotional responses to writing tasks, reducing anxiety and perceived difficulties, and ultimately improving their overall writing performance. This proactive and strategic approach in the writing process exemplifies the essence of SRL in action, demonstrating its practical application in overcoming common writing challenges.

Self-regulated writing strategy and writing performance

Self-regulated writing strategies have been found to be influential in writing proficiency and L2 writing quality 19 , 20 . Studies have shown that the implementation of such strategies can result in a marked improvement in writing proficiency 21 , particularly for those who struggle to acquire the necessary writing skills 22 . These strategies are essential in motivating, inspiring, and sustaining the dedication and perseverance of learners 23 , 24 , thus leading to better writing outcomes and improved writing performance 25 . Students who do not possess self-regulated writing strategies are more likely to experience negative emotions and be discouraged when confronted with writing tasks 20 , 26 , 27 . This can have a detrimental effect on their writing performance.

Teng and Zhang 8 proposed a model for self-regulated strategies in L2 writing, comprised of cognitive, metacognitive, social-behavioral, and motivational regulation dimensions. Cognitive strategies refer to the techniques utilized by L2 writers to manage information processing while completing a task. Metacognitive strategies encompass the management of cognitive processes to make the most of cognitive resources and meet the requirements of the task. Social-behavioral strategies involve the efforts of L2 writers to adjust their learning behaviors in response to contextual and environmental factors. Finally, motivational regulation strategies denote the methods employed by L2 writers to sustain or increase their motivation, which can ultimately improve their engagement and success in completing the task. This study builds on Teng and Zhang’s 8 model of self-regulated writing strategies, which acknowledges the multifaceted nature of self-regulated writing strategies 28 , and is specifically designed for Chinese university students, the same population this research is targeting. This study further investigates the various kinds of these strategies.

Research has demonstrated the impact of various self-regulated writing strategies on writing performance. Zimmerman 29 emphasized the importance of emotional control strategies in managing negative emotions, such as anxiety or worries about writing. Bai et al. 22 found that primary school students used various writing strategies, such as monitoring, evaluating, planning, resourcing, revising, and text-generating strategies, which were associated with their English competence. De Silva and Graham 9 showed that proficiency in metacognitive writing strategies, including planning, monitoring, and evaluation, had a positive effect on writing outcomes. Qin and Zhang 30 proposed that self-regulated writing strategies, such as evaluating, monitoring, and planning, were essential factors in predicting writing performance. Teng et al. 25 revealed that in an EFL setting, writing performance of secondary school students is contingent on their understanding and application of writing strategies related to emotional control, goal-oriented evaluation, goal-oriented monitoring, memorization, metacognitive judgment, and planning.

However, while the benefits of self-regulated writing strategies are well-documented, the literature reveals a gap in understanding how these strategies interact with individual learner characteristics, such as writing anxiety and perceived writing difficulty. Most studies have focused on the strategies themselves, rather than how they combine with other factors to influence L2 writing performance. For instance, the model proposed by Teng and Zhang 8 categorizes self-regulated strategies into cognitive, metacognitive, social-behavioral, and motivational dimensions but does not fully explore their interplay with individual psychological factors in an L2 writing context. The present study seeks to bridge this gap by examining the relationship between different types of self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, and perceived writing difficulty, and their combined effect on L2 writing performance.

Writing anxiety and writing performance

Anxiety related to writing can be a distinct form of anxiety 31 , 32 . Individuals who experience high levels of anxiety in writing tend to view writing as an unfulfilling task and it is possible for them to refrain from enrolling in writing classes and participating in situations where their written work will be assessed 33 . According to Cheng 31 , writing anxiety can be divided into three distinct categories: somatic, cognitive, and behavioral. Somatic anxiety is characterized by physical symptoms, such as a racing heart, gastrointestinal distress, and a feeling of tension. Cognitive anxiety is more psychological in nature, and involves worrying about one’s performance, having negative expectations, and being concerned about how others will view one's writing. Behavioral anxiety is demonstrated through avoidance, particularly in the form of avoiding writing. Cheng 31 found that all three types of writing anxiety were negatively correlated with individuals’ enthusiasm for English writing courses, motivation to write in English, self-assurance in their English writing ability, and their performance on a timed English composition task.

Research has demonstrated that writing anxiety has a detrimental effect on writing performance 34 , 35 . Specifically, Zabihi 34 found that writing anxiety had an adverse impact on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency of narrative performance, while Zabihi et al. 35 found that it led to an increase in the number of errors present in students’ narratives. Furthermore, Abolhasani et al. 36 found that undergraduates’ graph writing performance was impaired by their L2 writing anxiety. Conversely, writers with low levels of anxiety have been observed to exhibit fewer anxious writing behaviors, devote more time to ideation, produce multiple drafts, and allocate greater amounts of time to the writing process 37 .

Previous research has indicated a negative correlation between writing anxiety and writing performance, however, Lee 38 conducted a study on Taiwanese EFL learners and found that writing anxiety did not have a significant effect on their writing performance. Payant et al. 39 conducted another study that revealed writing anxiety to be a favorable predictor of performance on a source-based writing task. This was attributed to the fact that test anxiety, which had a beneficial effect on performance, was often experienced by participants. These conflicting results highlight the need for further investigation into how writing anxiety influences L2 writing performance.

Perceived writing difficulty and writing performance

Writing difficulty perceived by L2 writers is a subjective judgement, which is significantly affected by their skill level and emotional state 14 .This perception is based on the allocation of cognitive resources or the mental effort required to fulfill the demands of the writing task 15 , which is a result of the interplay between personal endowments and features of writing tasks 40 . To gain a thorough comprehension of writing performance, it is essential to take into account writing difficulty perceived by L2 learners 14 , as this provides an essential explanation of the mental effort needed to handle cognitive loads in L2 writing.

Owing to the increased cognitive and linguistic demands involved in writing in a non-native language, a significant proportion of EFL learners perceive English writing as a difficult and challenging task. Rabab’ah 41 observed that those who come from Asian universities often encountered difficulties when attempting to adjust to the requisites of English academic writing. The presence of negative thoughts about L2 writing or perceived difficulties regarding L2 writing had a significant impact on L2 writers’ ability to convey their ideas in writing 42 , thus influenced their writing performance. In addition to other factors, writing instructors concurred that students’ perception of difficult with EFL academic writing was a contributing factor to their poor writing performance 43 . Despited the negative influece of writing difficulty perception on writing performance, Wei and Zhang 44 found that the degree of difficulty that L2 writers perceive in L2 writing could be indicative of their awareness of the inadequacy of their L2 writing knowledge or their uncertainty about the L2 writing process. This perception of writing difficutl could prompt Chinese EFL student writers to utilize their L1 rhetorical knowledge to aid in their L2 composing processes.

There has been a dearth of research examining the impact of perceived writing difficulty on the writing performance of L2 learners, let alone the interplay between this perception, self-regulated writing strategies, and writing anxiety. Consequently, this study examined these three factors and explored how they configurate to influence writing performance of L2 learners.

Interplay of self-regulated writing strategy, writing anxiety, and perceived writing difficulty

In the realm of L2 writing research, the intricate interplay of strategy use, anxiety, and task difficulty has been explored to understand their collective impact on L2 writing performance. Zhou et al. 45 used a structural equation modeling approach to investigate the relationships among L2 writing anxiety, L2 writing self-efficacy, L2 writing self-regulated strategies and L2 writing engagement, and possible mediators that regulate the effect of individual factors. A questionnaire was administered to 340 Chinese high school students and L2 writing anxiety was found negatively associated with L2 writing self-regulated strategies. Manson et al. 46 discovered that the development of self-regulated strategies significantly and positively impacts students with learning disabilities (LD) across both elementary and secondary education levels. Notably, these strategies have been effective in reducing the students’ perceived writing difficulties.

QCA in L2 writing

Understanding the application and importance of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) in L2 writing research is crucial, given the complex nature of language learning and writing processes. QCA, as a method, stands out for its ability to handle complexity and multifaceted phenomena, which are inherent in L2 writing. This method is particularly suitable for analyzing L2 writing because it allows for the examination of various combinations of causal conditions (such as language proficiency, cognitive strategies, first language influence, and instructional methods) and their relationship to writing outcomes. Employing QCA, Mallahi et al. 47 explored the role of a set of cognitive (i.e., aptitude and working memory) and motivational (i.e., self-regulatory capacity and self-efficacy beliefs) individual difference variables in the writing quality and composing behavior of 78 Iranian undergraduate EFL learners.

The applicability of QCA is further highlighted by its capacity to accommodate diverse data types and sources, making it well-suited for interdisciplinary research like L2 writing studies, which often integrate linguistic, psychological, and educational perspectives. Sazideh and Mallahi 48 employed a qualitative case study approach, incorporating techniques like narrative construction and qualitative comparative analysis. They examined how individuals with diverse cognitive characteristics, including language learning aptitude and working memory, respond to various forms of feedback (e.g., direct, indirect with error codes, metalinguistic with explanations) on linguistic aspects of their writing. Additionally, they analyzed how these characteristics might impact their learning from the feedback, illustrating the influence of temporal and proficiency-related factors on the L2 writing process. This methodological versatility is essential for dissecting the layered dimensions of L2 writing, providing a more comprehensive understanding of how various factors interact to influence writing proficiency. Therefore, QCA emerges not just as a choice but as a necessary tool for researchers aiming to construct a holistic picture of L2 writing, accommodating its inherent complexity and the interplay of multiple influential factors.

A review of the literature has revealed a lack of understanding regarding the relationship between self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, and writing difficulty and their impact on L2 writing performance. More precise and insightful outcomes can be obtained by taking into account the configurations of these factors. This study aims to answer the following question:

What configurations of self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, and perceived writing difficulty, are associated with high and low writing performance in Chinese EFL learners?

Conceptual model

Research has indicated that self-regulated writing strategies are influential in determining L2 writing performance. However, the types of self-regulated writing strategies have not been fully explored. Moreover, the impact of such strategies may become complex when learners’ perception of writing anxiety and writing difficult is taken into consideration. Therefore, following Teng and Zhang 8 , we categorized writing strategies into cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, social-behavioral strategies, and motivational regulation strategies and integrated them with writing anxiety and writing difficulty to examine the interaction between these factors and their impact on writing performance. To investigate this relationship, we propose a conceptual model. Our model posits that EFL writing is a multifarious and intricate process, wherein writing performance can be accounted for by configuration of self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, and perceived writing difficulty. Figure  1 showed our configurational research model.

Venn diagram of the conceptual model. CS cognitive strategies, MS metacognitive strategies, SBS social-behavioral strategies, MRS motivational regulation strategies, WA writing anxiety, WD writing difficulty.

Fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis

Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) bridges the gap between qualitative and quantitative research 49 . It is a configurational approach that recognizes that social phenomena are often interconnected rather than isolated 16 . It comprises three modes of operation: crisp set QCA, multi-value set QCA, and fuzzy set QCA 50 . fsQCA is the chosen methodology for this study as it is especially suitable for dealing with issues that involve categorical variables as well as continuous variables 16 . It is useful to handle complex issues such as writing performance, which is affected by multiple factors.

The fsQCA is particularly effective for this analysis as it can explore how different combinations of variables contribute to writing performance, moving beyond the limitations of traditional statistical methods that typically focus on isolated impacts of individual variables. The use of fsQCA is advantageous in the context of language learning, which often involves complex, non-linear interactions among factors. This method allows us to identify specific configurations of factors that produce particular outcomes, providing a nuanced understanding of the collective impact of these elements on EFL writing performance. Our choice of fsQCA, especially considering our sample size of 94 participants, aligns with the recommendations of Poorkavoos et al. 51 . They noted the method’s suitability for small to medium-sized samples and its ability to uncover intricate causal relationships that might not be evident in larger datasets suited for regression analysis.

Participants

A total of 107 undergraduate and postgraduate students from a university in Eastern China voluntarily participated in the 2022 FLTRP∙ETIC Cup English Writing Contest, a highly regarded annual national event. These participants were recruited through an open call for entries to all eligible students at the university, allowing any interested student to sign up freely. This process ensured that the selection of the 107 participants was random and voluntary, reflecting a diverse and representative sample. Out of these, 94 students completed a paper questionnaire that explored their use of self-regulated writing strategies, along with perceptions of writing anxiety and difficulty, resulting in an 87.85% response rate. The questionnaires were distributed following the contest, ensuring that the participants’ responses were based on their direct and recent experiences in the contest. This approach aimed to accurately capture and understand the self-regulation strategies and experiences of university students in English writing contexts.

Out of the 94 participants, 26 (27.66%) were male and 68 (72.34%) were female. Furthermore, 12 (12.77%) were postgraduates and 82 (87.23%) were undergraduates. 50% of the participants specialized in English, while the other half majored in non-English subjects. Figure  2 provides a visual representation of the participants’ demographic information.

Demographic information of participants (n = 94).

• Writing performance

To accurately measure the writing performance of participants, we utilized the scores from the 2022 FLTRP∙ETIC Cup English Writing Contest, recognized as the most prestigious writing contest in China. The contest, spanning a duration of two hours, challenged participants in both argumentative and expository writing. It was evaluated on a total score of 100 points, with criteria based on comprehensive, rigorous, and equitable standards.

The judging criteria were detailed as follows: 40% on Content/Ideas, 30% on Organization/Development, 30% on Language. These criteria ensured a thorough assessment of participants’ ability to express clear ideas, organize content coherently, and use language effectively. Additionally, the contest utilized the iWrite English writing teaching and rating system for automated scoring support. This system, with a correction accuracy rate of 98% and a recall rate of 70%, ensures high consistency between human and machine ratings, with a consistency rate of 0.9. The system evaluates based on four dimensions: language, content, structure, and technical standards, offering customized scoring for different genres like application documents, argumentative essays, expository essays, narrative essays, and academic writing.

By employing these stringent and equitable criteria, along with advanced automated scoring technology, the contest provided an accurate assessment of participants’ writing performance, reflecting their skills in argumentative and expository writing.

• Self-regulated writing strategies

The Writing Strategies for Self-Regulated Learning Questionnaire 8 , was used to evaluate the application of self-regulated writing strategies. This questionnaire comprised 40 items, focusing on dimensions of cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, social-behavioral strategies, and motivational regulation strategies. Each measured on a 7-point Liker scale, with scores ranging from 1 (not at all true of me) to 7 (very true of me).

Cognitive strategies (CS) refer to the strategies that students employ to process and utilize information or knowledge while completing a writing task. This dimension encompasses two aspects, namely text processing and course memory. The former, consisting of 6 items, assesses students’ utilization of linguistic, rhetorical, and discourse knowledge to produce a written text (e.g., When writing, I check the structure for logical coherence). The latter, comprising 3 items, evaluates students’ active retention of writing knowledge acquired from writing courses (e.g., I write useful words and expressions taught in writing courses to help me remember them).

Metacognitive strategies (MS) encompass three kinds of abilities that empower learners to manage and manipulate their own cognition and cognitive resources to fulfill the requirements of particular writing tasks. Idea planning, consisting of 3 items, refers to the specific behavior of generating ideas before writing (e.g., Before writing, I use the Internet to search for related information to help me plan). Goal-oriented monitoring and evaluating, consisting of 6 items, includes a range of strategies such as setting goals to direct writing activities (e.g., When learning to write, I set up goals for myself in order to direct my learning activities) and monitoring and evaluating knowledge and performance mastery in writing courses (e.g., I monitor my learning process in writing courses; I evaluate the mastery of the knowledge or skills learned in writing courses).

Social-behavioral strategies (SBS) involve conscious efforts by individuals to adjust their writing behavior in response to the context and environment. This dimension includes two main components: feedback handling and peer learning. The former, consisting of 4 items, relates to how students approach and react to feedback from both teachers and peers with the goal of enhancing their English writing abilities (e.g., I try to improve my English writing based on teachers’ feedback). The latter, comprising 3 items, involves seeking help from peers within the learning environment, thus constituting a social interaction (e.g., I discuss with my peers to have more ideas to write).

Motivational regulation strategies (MRS) are deliberate approaches used by students to maintain or enhance their motivation when engaging in writing tasks. This dimension encompasses motivational self-talk, interest enhancement, and emotional control. Motivational self-talk, consisting of 8 items, involves self-encouragement in knowledge mastery and academic performance (e.g., I remind myself about how important it is to get good grades in writing courses). Interest enhancement, comprising 4 items, reflects students’ inclination to make learning more enjoyable (e.g., I look for ways to bring more fun to the learning of writing). Emotional control, consisting of 3 items, measures learners’ efforts to minimize distractions when completing a writing task or learning to write (e.g., I find ways to regulate my mood when I want to give up writing).

The internal consistency of the dimensions of self-regulated strategies was found to be high, as evidenced by the reliability coefficients of 0.881, 0.891, 0.817, and 0.917, which surpass the accepted threshold of 0.7 52 , 53 , thereby demonstrating the questionnaire’s reliability.

• Writing anxiety

The second language writing anxiety inventory (SLWAI) 31 was utilized to measure writing anxiety. Cheng 31 affirmed the reliability and validity of this scale. The participants were asked to answer three dimensions with 21 items in a 5-point Likert scale. Somatic anxiety dimension comprised of 7 items that referred to the physiological effects of anxiety (e.g., I feel my heart pounding when I write English compositions under time constraint). Cognitive anxiety dimension included 8 items that pertained to the mental aspects of anxiety (e.g., While writing English compositions, I feel worried and uneasy if I know they will be evaluated). Avoidance behavior dimension was composed of 6 items that indicated a tendency to avoid completing writing assignments or even retreating from such tasks altogether (e.g., I usually do my best to avoid writing English compositions). These dimensions have high internal consistency, with respective values of 0.763, 0.720, and 0.682, being higher or close to the accepted threshold of 0.7.

Writing difficulty

To evaluate the difficulty level of writing for students, we have utilized a collection of 12 items (e.g., I can’t write appropriate English sentences to express my ideas) from Wu 54 . These items are evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale from 1 “strongly disagree” to 5 “strongly agree”. The instrument as a whole exhibited a reliability coefficient of 0.873, which surpasses the accepted threshold of 0.7.

Data collection

Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study. Data was collected from participants of the 2022 FLTRP∙ETIC Cup English Writing Contest at a university in Eastern China. To evaluate the EFL writing performance of the participants, writing scores were used. These scores were sourced primarily from the official results released by the organizers of the contest. This approach ensures that the evaluation of each participant’s writing skills is based on a standardized and authoritative assessment, reflecting their actual performance in the competition. After the writing contest, participants were asked to complete a questionnaire, which measured self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, and writing difficulty. They were also informed that their data would be kept confidential and used solely for research purposes, and were free to withdraw from the study at any time.

Data analysis

This study utilized fsQCA, a method that is suitable for exploring complex configurations of constructs 16 . fsQCA involves assessing the connections between the outcome variable (i.e., writing performance) and all possible combinations of binary states (i.e., presence or absence of its causal conditions). The software fsQCA 3.0 was used.

fsQCA entails a pre-data analysis calibration process 16 . This study utilized the direct method, employing a three-value scheme, to calibrate both causal conditions and outcome measures, which is consistent with previous research 55 , 56 . The three-value scheme prescribes the identification of three anchors for every set, encompassing the threshold for full membership, the threshold for full non-membership, and the cross-over point 16 . The calibration procedure then utilizes a logistic function to allocate values to these anchors, leading to the conversion of outcomes and causal conditions into fuzzy membership scores on the log odds of full membership by means of the fsQCA3.0 software 57 . This study used results and antecedent of 95%, 50%, and 5% quantile values. In addition, to limit “researcher degrees of freedom” and avoid “distortion of the results”, we applied the same calibration rule—the 95th, 50th, and 5th percentiles—consistently across all outcomes and causal conditions in this study 58 . Table 1 summarizes the calibration thresholds of the fuzzy sets.

Then based on calibrated fuzzy sets, we conducted a necessary condition analysis and a sufficient condition analysis. The results would be analyzed in the following section.

Ethics declarations

All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Ethics Committee of Qufu Normal University. Informed consent was obtained from all subjects.

Descriptive statistics

Table  2 provided descriptive statistics of participants’ writing performance, self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, and perceived writing difficulty. On average, the writing performance scored 72.24, indicating a relatively high level. However, there was a large range in scores, with the maximum being 90 and the minimum being 29. The most commonly used self-regulated writing strategies were motivational regulation strategies, followed by cognitive, metacognitive, and social-behavioral strategies. The mean scores for writing anxiety and difficulty were 2.75 and 2.81 respectively, and the highest and lowest scores for each were 5 and 1.10, and 5 and 1.17, respectively. According to West et al. 59 , skewness values less than |2| and kurtosis values less than |7| indicate a lack of significant deviation from normality. The skewness and kurtosis presented in Table  2 confirm the absence of any notable departure from normality.

Analysis of necessary conditions

Crucial to consider are necessary conditions that play a vital role in determining the outcome as their presence is an indispensable element 60 . To put it simply, without the existence of a necessary condition, the outcome is impossible to realize 61 , 62 . Employing the software of fsQCA 3.0, Table  3 illustrates an inquiry into necessary conditions for both high and low writing performance.

The presence of a necessary condition is contingent upon meeting the consistency and coverage criteria of at least 0.90 and 0.50, respectively, as stipulated by Ragin 63 and Pappas et al. 64 . As Table  3 demonstrated, none of the values met this threshold, indicating that there were no independent necessary conditions that account for high writing performance. Similarly, no single variable could be identified as a necessary condition for low writing performance. Thus, there were no necessary conditions to produce the outcome of high or low writing performance. The outcome required a combination of conditions, implying that multiple conditions should be integrated for configuration analysis.

Analysis of sufficient conditions

While a necessary condition is always a prerequisite for an outcome, a sufficient condition denotes that a particular condition or a combination of conditions is capable of leading to the outcome on its own 61 , 62 .

In order to determine the sufficient conditions for high and low writing performance, the calibrated data was integrated into a fuzzy set truth table and analyzed using fsQCA 3.0 software. The truth table encompassed all possible configurations of the conditions, with the elimination of rows containing less than 2 cases to refine the results. Moreover, configurations with a consistency of less than 0.90 and PRI (Proportional Reduction in Inconsistency) of less than 0.50 were assigned a value of “0” to ensure the sufficiency of the configurations with satisfactory quality 16 , 65 . In order for a given configuration to meet the criteria of being “sufficient”, it must possess consistency and coverage values that are ≥ 0.75 and ≥ 0.20 64 , 66 . Table  4 illustrates the sufficient solutions for modeling high and low writing performance in a diagrammatic form.

Table  4 provides a visual representation of the conditions sufficient for the outcome. The presence of a condition implies that a learner has a membership score above 0.5, as determined by the calibration procedure. In simpler terms, if a condition is present, it means that the variable value is higher than the median for the sample group. Conversely, if a condition is absent, it means that the variable value is lower than the median for the sample group. Blank spaces indicate that the conditions are not necessary for achieving the desired outcome. This information is based on the research conducted by Misangyi and Acharya 67 and Bedford et al. 68 .

Grasping configurational solutions gives a complete view of the correlation between the adoption of self-regulated writing strategies and the diverse feelings of writing anxiety and difficulty, both of which can notably affect the writing performance of EFL learners. Our configurational analysis operates on the premise that self-regulated writing strategies, as well as perceptions of writing difficulty and writing anxieties, do not operate independently of each other in influencing learners’ writing performance. Table  4 outlines the 10 configurations that resulted in either high or low writing performance. These configurations serve as evidence that there exist diverse strategic pathways that culminate in equifinal outcomes. This, in turn, corroborates the presence of numerous causal associations in the realm of writing performance. The solution coverages for high writing performance and low writing performance were 0.574 and 0.565, respectively. This indicated a high degree of explanatory power, and all configurations exhibited exceptional levels of consistency, with values of 0.880 and 0.853 in high and low writing performance, respectively. These findings suggested that the configurations were highly effective in producing the desired outcomes.

Configurations for high writing performance

It is noteworthy that six different configurations (C1–C6) have been identified as potential causal connections that lead to high writing performance (Table  4 ). The first two configurations (C1–C2) share common core conditions, which involve the implementation of cognitive strategies and low levels of writing anxiety and difficulty. This suggests that cognitive strategies are the primary factor influencing high writing performance in individuals with low levels of writing anxiety and difficult. Consequently, these configurations are categorized as a cognition-driven type, where writing performance is heavily dependent on cognitive writing strategies. An in-depth explanation of these two configurations is provided.

C1: CS*MS* ~ SBS* ~ WA * ~ WD (~ , negation (NOT); * , logical conjunction (AND)) (Table  4 ). C1 is a configuration that can lead to high writing performance, comprised of a core condition of cognitive strategies, a peripheral condition of metacognitive strategies, and an absence of social-behavioral strategies, writing anxiety, and writing difficulty. This configuration has a unique coverage rate of 0.020 and a consistency measure of 0.917, and it covers 31.3% of sets. This finding suggests that learners with low levels of writing anxiety and difficult can improve their writing ability through the use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies, even if social-behavioral strategies are not used extensively.

C2: CS* ~ SBS*MRS* ~ WA* ~ WD (Table  4 ). Configuration C2 has the potential to lead to high writing performance. It consists of a core condition of cognitive strategies, a peripheral condition of motivational regulation strategies, and an absence of social-behavioral strategies, writing anxiety, and writing difficulty. This configuration has a unique coverage rate of 0.025 and a consistency measure of 0.910, covering 31.9% of sets. It implies that learners with minimal writing anxiety and difficulty can enhance their writing performance by utilizing more cognitive and motivational regulation strategies, even if they use social-behavioral strategies less frequently.

Configurations C3–C6 are categorized as a social-behavior-driven type due to their shared core conditions centered on the incorporation of social-behavioral strategies, indicating that the adoption of these strategies is the most important factor for high writing performance. These four configurations are further explained in detail.

C3: ~ CS*SBS*MRS* ~ WA* ~ WD (Table  4 ). Configuration C3 suggests that high writing performance can be achieved without the presence of writing difficulty as core conditions and writing anxiety as peripheral conditions, but with the presence of social-behavioral and motivational strategies as core and peripheral conditions, respectively. This configuration has a unique coverage rate of 0.010, a consistency of 0.897, and covers 28.3% of sets. Therefore, it is suggested that individuals who are not troubled with writing anxiety and difficult may benefit from an increased usage of social-behavioral and motivational strategies to improve their writing performance, even if cognitive strategies are not relied upon as heavily.

C4: ~ CS* ~ MS*SBS*MRS* ~ WD (Table  4 ). Configuration C4 shows that high writing performance can be achieved with the absence of writing difficulty as a peripheral condition, and the presence of social-behavioral strategies and motivational regulation strategies as core conditions, cognitive strategies as a core condition’s absence, and metacognitive strategies as a peripheral condition’s absence. The unique coverage rate is 0.017, the consistency is 0.904, and the results cover 28.8% of sets. This indicates that when the perceived writing difficulty is low, a higher level of use of social-behavioral strategies and motivational strategies can improve learners’ writing performance, even when the use of cognitive strategies and metacognitive strategies is low.

C5: MS*SBS* ~ MRS*WA*WD (Table  4 ). Configuration C5 is the most explainable configuration of high writing performance, with the presence of metacognitive strategies and social-behavioral strategies, and the absence of motivational strategies as core conditions, the presence of perceived writing anxiety and difficulty as peripheral conditions. It boasts a high level of consistency (0.917) and unique coverage (0.071), and covers 28.3% of sets, which is indicative of its ability to explain a significant proportion of the results that lead to successful writing. Despite the challenges posed by perceived writing anxiety and difficult, learners can still strive to improve their writing performance by employing a greater number of metacognitive and social-behavioral strategies.

C6: CS*MS*SBS*MRS*WA * ~ WD (Table  4 ). Configuration C6 reveals a coverage rate of 0.060 and a consistency of 0.916, covering 30.0% of sets. This configuration consists of the absence of writing difficulty and the presence of writing anxiety as core conditions, high writing performance can be achieved by using social-behavioral strategies and motivational strategies as core conditions, and cognitive strategies and metacognitive strategies as a peripheral condition. It is possible for learners to achieve a high level of writing performance even if they experience a high degree of writing anxiety, as demonstrated by the evidence from C6. This can be accomplished through the implementation of cognitive, metacognitive, social-behavioral, and motivational strategies.

Configurations for low writing performance

Table  4 demonstrates that four distinct configurations, C7–C10, exhibit low writing performance. These configurations share a core condition of high writing anxiety, as well as a lack of self-regulated writing strategies. This suggests that the primary cause of the low writing performance is the presence of heightened writing anxiety and the absence of certain writing strategies. Consequently, these four configurations can be classified as an anxiety-troubled type. Further details of these configurations are provided.

C7: ~ CS* ~ MS* ~ SBS* ~ MRS *WA (Table  4 ). C7 is a configuration with higher levels of writing anxiety, lower level of use of cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, social-behavioral strategies, and motivational strategies. The unique coverage is 0.046, the consistency is 0.893, and it covers 47.3% of sets. This indicates that such a configuration can result in low writing performance among learners.

C8: ~ CS* ~ MS* ~ MRS *WA*WD (Table  4 ). C8 indicates that a diminished use of cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational strategies can negatively impact writing performance in learners who experience high levels of writing anxiety and difficult. This conclusion is supported by a unique coverage of 0.029 and a consistency of 0.885. And it covers 45.6% of sets.

C9: ~ CS* ~ MS* ~ SBS* WA*WD (Table  4 ). C9 highlights that when dealing with learners who possess a high level of writing anxiety and difficult, a low usage of cognitive, metacognitive, and social-behavioral strategies may result in poor writing performance. The unique coverage rate is recorded at 0.021, the consistency stands at 0.891, and it covers 44.8% of sets.

C10: MS* ~ SBS* ~ MRS *WA*WD (Table  4 ). C10 shows that in the context of individuals who exhibit high level of perceived writing anxiety and difficulty, a reduced employment of social-behavioral and motivational strategies can result in low writing performance, despite a high level of utilization of metacognitive strategies. This is indicated by a unique coverage rate of 0.043 and a consistency score of 0.913. And it covers 32.0% of sets.

Discussion and implications

Table  4 presents configurations contingent upon the attributes of EFL learners, including their utilization of self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxieties, and perception of writing difficulties. These elements have significant impacts on writing performance, with configurations C1–C6 indicating high writing performance, and configurations C7–C10 indicating low writing performance. Three general types of configurations were identified: cognition-driven, social-behavior-driven, and anxiety-troubled.

If EFL learners possess a high level of cognitive and metacognitive strategies, along with low levels of writing anxiety and difficult, as per configuration C1, they are likely to achieve high writing performance. The employment of social-behavior strategies is not crucial for achieving such performance, and the presence of motivational strategies does not significantly affect the outcome. According to configuration C2, EFL learners can attain high writing performance if they possess a wealth of cognitive and motivational strategies, and concurrently experience a low degree of perceived writing anxiety and difficulty. The possession of social-behavioral strategies is not a fundamental requirement for high writing performance, and metacognitive strategies are inconsequential.

The first two configurations (C1–C2) share common core conditions, which involve the implementation of cognitive strategies and low levels of writing anxiety and difficulty, which are categorized as the cognition-driven type, where writing performance is heavily dependent on cognitive writing strategies. This type partially aligns with Teng and Zhang 8 , which indicate that while motivational regulation strategies directly and indirectly affect EFL students’ writing performance and correlate significantly with their use of cognitive, metacognitive, and social behavior strategies, only cognitive and metacognitive strategies were significant mediators.

C3 shows that if EFL learners do not experience high level of writing anxiety or writing difficulty, it is probable that they can achieve high writing performance by utilizing cognitive strategies and metacognitive strategies, in addition to social-behavioral strategies and motivational strategies. C4 suggests that high writing performance can be realized by mitigating the writing difficulty and implementing social-behavioral and motivational writing strategies, even if cognitive and metacognitive strategies are not employed. In accordance with C5, it is possible for EFL learners to achieve high writing performance despite lacking in cognitive strategies and regardless of their possession of metacognitive strategies. This can be achieved through the possession of more social-behavioral strategies and motivational strategies, coupled with low levels of perceived writing anxiety and difficulty. According to the configuration C6, it is possible for EFL learners to achieve high levels of writing performance despite lacking in cognitive strategies and metacognitive strategies, provided that they possess an abundance of social-behavioral strategies and motivational strategies, and also maintain low levels of perceived writing difficulty. Furthermore, this outcome is not influenced by their level of writing anxiety.

Configurations C3–C6 are categorized as a social-behavior-driven type due to their shared core conditions centered on the incorporation of social-behavioral strategies. This finding aligns with the work Mohseniasl 69 , who highlights the role of explicit writing strategy instruction in alleviating writing difficulties, supporting our observation that focusing on specific types of writing strategies, such as social-behavioral and motivational, can lead to improved writing outcomes.

In the case of low writing performance, as per C7, EFL learners who exhibit high levels of writing anxiety and perceived writing difficulty are likely to experience a decline in writing performance if they lack cognitive strategies and metacognitive strategies and social-behavioral strategies, regardless of their possession of additional motivational strategies. As per C8, it is evident that EFL learners who possess high writing anxiety and perceived writing difficulty may face challenges in achieving high writing performance if they lack sufficient social-behavioral strategies and motivational strategies. This is irrespective of whether they possess more metacognitive strategies and regardless of whether they have more cognitive strategies or not. C9 posits that in the event that EFL learners exhibit high levels of anxiety when writing, their writing performance may suffer if they lack social-behavioral strategies and cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, and motivational strategies. Whether or not they experience significant writing difficulty is of no consequence. C10 posits that EFL learners who exhibit high levels of writing anxiety and perceived writing difficulty, may experience diminished writing performance if they do not possess the necessary cognitive strategies as well as metacognitive strategies and motivational strategies. Notably, the presence of social-behavioral strategies is not a key determinant of this outcome.

C7-C10, exhibit low writing performance. These configurations share a core condition of high writing anxiety and can be classified as an anxiety-troubled type. This finding is partially in line with Khosravi et al. 70 , who identified a significant negative relationship between writing anxiety and EFL learners’ writing performance, emphasizing the detrimental impact of high anxiety levels on writing.

This study provides valuable insights into the various self-regulated writing strategies that EFL learners can adopt to improve their L2 writing performance, depending on their degree of writing anxiety and difficult. The results are of great significance to the field of pedagogy, as they demonstrate the configurational impacts of writing strategies, writing anxiety, and writing difficulty on writing performance. Consequently, instructors of EFL writing classes can introduce tailored interventions to enhance learners’ writing performance. Additionally, this study proposes an alternative approach to promote the use of writing strategies, taking into account individual characteristics such as perceptions of writing anxiety and writing difficulty.

This study presents a novel approach to evaluating the potential impact of self-regulated writing strategies on writing performance of Chinese EFL learners. The research acknowledges influence of self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety and perceived writing difficulty on writing performance. To evaluate the role of these factors and their collective impact, a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) is used. The results indicate that diverse configurations can lead to either high or low writing performance. Specifically, two configurations fall under the cognition-driven type, which highlights the importance of cognitive writing strategies in high writing performance, while four configurations of the social-behavior-driven type emphasize the significance of social-behavioral writing strategies in high writing performance. On the other hand, it can be inferred that a lack of writing strategies coupled with writing anxiety may result in low writing performance, as exemplified by the four instances of the anxiety-troubled configuration. The above configurations provide educators and instructors with valuable insights on how to provide tailored guidance or corrective measures that can enhance writing performance of EFL learners, depending on the particular configuration, which includes both core and peripheral conditions.

This study provides valuable insights; however, its limitations cannot be ignored. To begin with, the participants were selected in one university, thus, the results cannot be generalized to a wider population. Instead, they can contribute to a better comprehension of the intricate relationships between self-regulated writing strategies, writing anxiety, writing difficulty, and writing performance. Additionally, most data in this study were collected from self-report questionnaires. It’s important to recognize that self-reports, while insightful, can be subject to social desirability bias. This occurs when respondents modify their answers to align with perceived social expectations, potentially skewing the results. To enhance the validity of future research, a more diverse methodological approach is recommended. Integrating objective assessment tools, such as direct behavioral observations or technology-assisted data collection like keystroke analysis, could complement self-reported data. These methods would not only offset the limitations of self-reports but also provide a richer, deeper understanding of the writing process in L2 learners. Lastly, it is essential to note that this study only focused on writing strategies, writing anxiety, and writing difficulty, while writing is a multifaceted and complex process that involves a range of other factors that could affect writing performance. Future research endeavors should consider a broader range of variables to examine the reasons for the variation in writing performance with different combinations of conditions.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Santangelo, T., Harris, K. R. & Graham, S. Self-regulated strategy development: A validated model to support students who struggle with writing. Learn. Disabil. Contemp. J. 5 (1), 1–20 (2007).

Google Scholar  

Wengelin, Å. Examining pauses in writing: Theory, methods and empirical data. In Computer Keystroke Logging and Writing Vol. 18 (eds Sullivan, K. H. & Lindgren, E.) 107–130 (Elsevier, 2006).

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Shen, B., Bai, B. & Xue, W. The effects of peer assessment on learner autonomy: An empirical study in a Chinese college English writing class. Stud. Educ. Eval. 64 , 100821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.100821 (2020).

Article   Google Scholar  

Teng, L. S. Changes in teachers’ beliefs after a professional development project for teaching writing: Two Chinese cases. J. Educ. Teach. 42 (1), 106–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2015.1135228 (2016).

Pintrich, P. R. Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. J. Educ. Psychol. 92 (3), 544–555. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.544 (2000).

Zimmerman, B. J. & Kitsantas, A. Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. J. Educ. Psychol. 94 (4), 660–668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.660 (2002).

Bai, B., Wang, J. & Nie, Y. Self-efficacy, task values and growth mindset: What has the most predictive power for primary school students’ self-regulated learning in English writing and writing competence in an Asian confucian cultural context?. Camb. J. Educ. 51 (1), 64–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2020.1778639 (2021).

Teng, L. S. & Zhang, L. J. Fostering strategic learning: The development and validation of the writing strategies for motivational regulation questionnaire (WSMRQ). Asia Pac. Educ. Res. 25 , 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-015-0243-4 (2016).

De Silva, R. & Graham, S. The effects of strategy instruction on writing strategy use for students of different proficiency levels. System 53 , 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.06.009 (2015).

Bai, B. & Guo, W. Influences of self-regulated learning strategy use on self-efficacy in primary school students’ English writing in Hong Kong. Read. Writ. Q. 34 (6), 523–536. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2018.1499058 (2018).

Bloom, L. Z. Anxious writers in context: Graduate school and beyond. In When a Writer Can’t Write (ed. Rose, M.) 119–133 (Guilford Press, 1985).

Rasool, U., Qian, J. & Aslam, M. Z. An investigation of foreign language writing anxiety and its reasons among pre-service EFL teachers in Pakistan. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.947867 (2023).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hassan, B. A. The Relationship of Writing Apprehension and Self-Esteem to the Writing Quality and Quantity of EFL University Students . https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED459671.pdf (2001).

Cho, M. Task complexity and modality: Exploring learners’ experience from the perspective of flow. Mod. Lang. J. 102 (1), 162–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12460 (2018).

Sasayama, S. Is a ‘complex’ task really complex? Validating the assumption of cognitive task complexity. Mod. Lang. J. 100 (1), 231–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12313 (2016).

Ragin, C. C. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond (University of Chicago Press, 2008).

Book   Google Scholar  

Hertel, S. & Karlen, Y. Implicit theories of self-regulated learning: Interplay with students’ achievement goals, learning strategies, and metacognition. Educ. Psychol. 91 (3), 972–996 (2021).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Wirth, J., Stebner, F., Trypke, M., Schuster, C. & Leutner, D. An interactive layers model of self-regulated learning and cognitive load. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 32 , 1127–1149 (2020).

Teng, M. F. & Huang, J. Predictive effects of writing strategies for self-regulated learning on secondary school learners’ EFL writing proficiency. Tesol Q. 53 (1), 232–247 (2019).

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Bai, B. & Guo, W. Motivation and self-regulated strategy use: Relationships to primary school students’ english writing in Hong Kong. Lang. Teach. Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819859921 (2021).

Teng, M. F., Qin, C. & Wang, C. Validation of metacognitive academic writing strategies and the predictive effects on academic writing performance in a foreign language context. Metacogn. Learn. 17 , 167–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09278-4 (2022).

Bai, R., Hu, G. & Gu, P. Y. The relationship between use of writing strategies and english proficiency in Singapore primary schools. Asia Pac. Educ. Res. 23 , 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-0110-0 (2014).

Teng, M. F. A comparison of text structure and self-regulated strategy instruction for elementary school students’ writing. Engl. Teach. Pract. Crit. 18 (3), 281–297. https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-07-2018-0070 (2019).

Zhang, L. J. & Qin, T. L. Validating a questionnaire on EFL writers’ metacognitive awareness of writing strategies in multimedia environments. In Metacognition in Language Learning and Teaching (eds Haukås, Å. et al. ) 157–178 (Routledge, 2018).

Teng, M. F., Wang, C. & Zhang, L. J. Assessing self-regulatory writing strategies and their predictive effects on young EFL learners’ writing performance. Assess. Writ. 51 , 100573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100573 (2022).

Harris, K. R., Santangelo, T. & Graham, S. Self-regulated strategy development in writing: Going beyond NLEs to a more balanced approach. Instrum. Sci. 36 , 395–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9062-9 (2008).

Harris, K. R., Graham, S., MacArthur, C., Reid, R. & Mason, L. H. Self-regulated learning processes and children’s writing. In Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance (eds Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, D. H.) 187–202 (Routledge, 2021).

Bazerman, C. What do sociocultural studies of writing tell us about learning to write. In Handbook of Writing Research 2nd edn (eds MacArthur, C. A. et al. ) 11–23 (The Guilford Press, 2016).

Zimmerman, B. J. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Pract. 41 (2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2 (2002).

Qin, L. T. & Zhang, L. J. English as a foreign language writers’ metacognitive strategy knowledge of writing and their writing performance in multimedia environments. J. Writ. Res. 12 (2), 394–413 (2019).

CAS   Google Scholar  

Cheng, Y. S. A measure of second language writing anxiety: Scale development and preliminary validation. J. Second Lang. Writ. 13 , 313–335 (2004).

Pae, T. I. Skill-based L2 anxieties revisited: Their intra-relations and the inter-relations with general foreign language anxiety. Appl. Linguist. 34 (2), 232–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams041 (2013).

Daly, J. A. & Miller, M. D. The empirical development of an instrument to measure writing apprehension. Res. Teach. Engl. 9 (3), 242–249 (1975).

Zabihi, R. The role of cognitive and affective factors in measures of L2 writing. Writ. Commun. 35 (1), 32–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088317735836 (2018).

Zabihi, R., Mousavi, S. H. & Salehian, A. The differential role of domain-specific anxiety in learners’ narrative and argumentative L2 written task performances. Curr. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-9850-6 (2018).

Abolhasani, H., Golparvar, S. E. & Robatjazi, M. A. Modelling the role of L2 writing anxiety in graph-based composing performance and strategy use. J. Psycholinguist. Res. 51 , 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-022-09858-8 (2022).

Abdel Latif, M. M. Sources of L2 writing apprehension: A study of Egyptian university students. J. Res. Read. 38 (2), 194–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01549.x (2015).

Lee, S. Y. Facilitating and inhibiting factors in English as a foreign language writing performance: A model testing with structural equation modeling. Lang. Learn. 55 (2), 335–374 (2005).

Payant, C., McDonough, K., Uludag, P. & Lindberg, R. Predicting integrated writing task performance: Source comprehension, prewriting planning, and individual differences. J. Engl. Acad. Purp. 40 , 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.06.001 (2019).

Pallotti, G. Assessing tasks: The case of interactional difficulty. Appl. Linguist. 40 (1), 176–197 (2019).

Rabab’ah, G. Communicating problems facing Arab learners of english. J. Lang. Learn. 3 (1), 180–197 (2003).

Al-Khasawneh, F. Writing for academic purposes: Problems faced by Arab postgraduate students of the college of business UUM. ESL World 9 (2), 1–23 (2010).

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Rahmat, N. H., Arepin, M., Yunos, D. R. M. & Rahaman, S. A. S. A. Analyzing perceived writing difficulties through the social cognitive theory. People Int. J. Soc. Sci. 3 , 1487–1499. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2017.32.14871499 (2017).

Wei, X. & Zhang, W. Investigating L2 writers’ metacognitive awareness about L1–L2 rhetorical differences. J. Engl. Acad. Purp. 46 , 100875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100875 (2020).

Zhou, J., Wang, S. & Wang, J. Investigating high schoolers’ L2 writing anxiety, L2 writing self-efficacy, L2 writing self-regulated strategies, and L2 writing engagement: Relationships and mediator. Front. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1012407 (2022).

Mason, L. H., Harris, K. R. & Graham, S. Self-regulated strategy development for students with writing difficulties. Theory Pract. 50 (1), 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2011.534922 (2011).

Mallahi, O., Amirian, S. M. R., Zareian, G. R. & Adel, S. M. R. An investigation into the individual differences correlates of Iranian undergraduate EFL learners’ writing competence: A mixed methods approach. Iran. J. Appl. Linguist. 19 (1), 99–140 (2016).

Sazideh, K. & Mallahi, O. How might cognitive factors affect Iranian EFL learners’ response to feedback provided on writing? An individual differences perspective. Int. J. Linguist. Lit. Transl. 4 (5), 42–55. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2021.4.5.3 (2021).

Ragin, C. C. Using qualitative comparative analysis to study causal complexity. Health Serv. Res. 34 , 1225–1239 (1999).

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Rihoux, B. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related systematic comparative methods: Recent advances and remaining challenges for social science research. Int. Sociol. 12 (5), 679–706. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580906067836 (2006).

Poorkavoos, M., Duan, Y., Edwards, J. S. & Ramanathan, R. Identifying the configurational paths to innovation in SMEs: A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. J. Bus. Res. 69 (12), 5843–5854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.11.013 (2016).

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. & Anderson, R. E. Multivariate Data Analysis 7th edn. (Prentice Hall, 2009).

Hair, J. F. et al. An introduction to structural equation modeling. In Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R. Classroom Companion: Business (eds Hair, J. F. et al. ) (Springer, 2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7_1 .

Wu, S. J. R. A comparison of Learners’ Beliefs About Writing in Their First and Second Language: Taiwanese Junior College Business-Major Students Studying English (The University of Texas, 2003).

Campbell, J., Sirmon, D. & Schijven, M. Fuzzy logic and the market: A configurational approach to investor perceptions of acquisition announcements. Acad. Manag. J. 59 (1), 163–187 (2016).

Fiss, P. C. Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Acad. Manag. J. 54 (2), 393–420. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.60263120 (2011).

Witt, M. A., Fainshmidt, S. & Aguilera, R. V. Our board, our rules: Nonconformity to global corporate governance norms. Admin. Sci. Q. 67 (1), 131–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392211022726 (2022).

Douglas, S., Berthod, O., Groenleer, M. & Nederhand, J. Pathways to collaborative performance: Examining the different combinations of conditions under which collaborations are successful. Policy Soc. 39 (4), 638–658. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2020.1769275 (2020).

West, S. G., Finch, J. F. & Curran, P. J. Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues and Applications (ed. Hoyle, R. H.) 56–75 (Sage, 1995).

Dul, J. Necessary condition analysis (NCA): Logic and methodology of ‘“necessary but not sufficient”’ causality. Organ. Res. Methods 19 (1), 10–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115584005 (2016).

Fiss, P. C. A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32 , 1180–1198 (2007).

Schneider, M. R. & Eggert, A. Embracing complex causality with the QCA method: An invitation. J. Bus. Mark. Manag. 7 (1), 312–328 (2014).

Ragin, C. C. Set relations in social research: Evaluating their consistency and coverage. Polit. Anal. 14 (3), 291–310. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpj019 (2006).

Pappas, I. O. & Woodside, A. G. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA): Guidelines for research practice in information systems and marketing. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 58 , 102310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.10231 (2021).

Mattke, J., Maier, C., Reis, L. & Weitzel, T. Bitcoin investment: A mixed methods study of investment motivations. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 3 , 261–285 (2021).

Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M. & Olya, H. The combined use of symmetric and asymmetric approaches: Partial least squares-structural equation modeling and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 33 (5), 1571–1592. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2020-1164 (2021).

Misangyi, V. F. & Acharya, A. G. Substitutes or complements? A configurational examination of corporate governance mechanisms. Acad. Manag. J. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0728 (2014).

Bedford, D. S., Malmi, T. & Sandelin, M. Management control effectiveness and strategy: An empirical analysis of packages and systems. Account. Organ. Soc. 51 , 12–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2016.04.002 (2016).

Mohseniasl, F. Examining the effect of strategy instruction on writing apprehension and writing achievement of EFL learners. Theory Pract. Lang. Stud. 4 (4), 811–817 (2014).

Khosravi, R., Dastgoshadeh, A. & Jalilzadeh, K. Writing metacognitive strategy-based instruction through flipped classroom: An investigation of writing performance, anxiety, and self-efficacy. Smart Learn. Environ. 10 , 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00264-8 (2023).

Download references

This study was supported by Social Science Planning Research Project of Shandong Province (Grant No. 23CSDJ24).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of College English Teaching, Qufu Normal University, Qufu, 273165, Shandong, China

Cunying Fan & Juan Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Cunying Fan conceptualised the study, analyzed the data, and wrote the main manuscript text. Juan Wang conceptualised the study, conducted the survey, and revised the manuscript. Both authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cunying Fan .

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1: Brief introduction of FLTRP·ETIC Cup English Writing Contest

The FLTRP·ETIC Cup English Writing Contest, initiated in 2013, has become a significant event in the field of English language teaching in China. The contest’s rigorously organized and executed processes ensure objective and fair evaluation, affirming its standardization and effectiveness. The contest’s topics and evaluation criteria, designed by a team of professionals, aim to comprehensively assess students’ English writing skills. More information about the FLTRP·ETIC Cup English Writing Contest can be found at https://uchallenge.unipus.cn/ .

Appendix 2: Brief introduction of 2022 FLTRP·ETIC Cup English Writing Contest

The preliminary content of the 2022 FLTRP·ETIC Cup English Writing Contest requires writing one argumentative essay (about 500 words) and one explanatory essay (300–500 words), with a total writing time of 120 min and a full score of 100. The argumentative essay, titled Big Data and Freedom of Choice, guides participants to discuss whether massive information truly provides abundant choices for people’s lives. The expository essay requires participants to choose one of the twenty-four solar terms, introducing its name, meaning, related customs, and  so on.

Appendix 3: Scoring scheme of writing tasks

Argumentative writing.

Content/Ideas (40%)

Writing effectively addresses the topic and the task.

Writing presents an insightful position on the issue.

The position is strongly and substantially supported or argued.

Organization/Development (30%)

Writing is well-organized and well-developed, using appropriate rhetorical devices (e.g. exemplifications, classification, analysis, comparison/contrast, etc.) to support the thesis or to illustrate ideas.

Writing displays coherence, progression, consistency and unity.

Textual elements are well-connected through explicit logical and/or linguistic transitions.

Language (30%)

Spelling is accurate.

Writing displays consistent facility in use of language.

Writing demonstrates appropriate register, syntactic variety, and effective use of vocabulary.

Expository writing

Writing presents a clear thesis.

Writing maintains a formal style and an objective tone.

Writing is well-organized and well-developed, using appropriate development patterns (e.g., definition, illustration, casual analysis, process analysis, classification, comparison/contrast, etc.) to support the thesis or to illustrate ideas.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Fan, C., Wang, J. Configurational impact of self-regulated writing strategy, writing anxiety, and perceived writing difficulty on EFL writing performance: an fsQCA approach. Sci Rep 14 , 11125 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-61537-x

Download citation

Received : 17 December 2023

Accepted : 07 May 2024

Published : 15 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-61537-x

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Perceived writing difficulty

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.