how long should a research project be

• Privacy Policy

Home » How To Write A Research Proposal – Step-by-Step [Template]

How To Write A Research Proposal – Step-by-Step [Template]

Table of Contents

How To Write a Research Proposal

Writing a Research proposal involves several steps to ensure a well-structured and comprehensive document. Here is an explanation of each step:

1. Title and Abstract

• Choose a concise and descriptive title that reflects the essence of your research.
• Write an abstract summarizing your research question, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes. It should provide a brief overview of your proposal.

2. Introduction:

• Provide an introduction to your research topic, highlighting its significance and relevance.
• Clearly state the research problem or question you aim to address.
• Discuss the background and context of the study, including previous research in the field.

3. Research Objectives

• Outline the specific objectives or aims of your research. These objectives should be clear, achievable, and aligned with the research problem.

4. Literature Review:

• Conduct a comprehensive review of relevant literature and studies related to your research topic.
• Summarize key findings, identify gaps, and highlight how your research will contribute to the existing knowledge.

5. Methodology:

• Describe the research design and methodology you plan to employ to address your research objectives.
• Explain the data collection methods, instruments, and analysis techniques you will use.
• Justify why the chosen methods are appropriate and suitable for your research.

6. Timeline:

• Create a timeline or schedule that outlines the major milestones and activities of your research project.
• Break down the research process into smaller tasks and estimate the time required for each task.

7. Resources:

• Identify the resources needed for your research, such as access to specific databases, equipment, or funding.
• Explain how you will acquire or utilize these resources to carry out your research effectively.

8. Ethical Considerations:

• Discuss any ethical issues that may arise during your research and explain how you plan to address them.
• If your research involves human subjects, explain how you will ensure their informed consent and privacy.

9. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

• Clearly state the expected outcomes or results of your research.
• Highlight the potential impact and significance of your research in advancing knowledge or addressing practical issues.

10. References:

• Provide a list of all the references cited in your proposal, following a consistent citation style (e.g., APA, MLA).

11. Appendices:

• Include any additional supporting materials, such as survey questionnaires, interview guides, or data analysis plans.

Research Proposal Format

The format of a research proposal may vary depending on the specific requirements of the institution or funding agency. However, the following is a commonly used format for a research proposal:

1. Title Page:

• Include the title of your research proposal, your name, your affiliation or institution, and the date.

2. Abstract:

• Provide a brief summary of your research proposal, highlighting the research problem, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes.

3. Introduction:

• Introduce the research topic and provide background information.
• State the research problem or question you aim to address.
• Explain the significance and relevance of the research.
• Review relevant literature and studies related to your research topic.
• Summarize key findings and identify gaps in the existing knowledge.
• Explain how your research will contribute to filling those gaps.

5. Research Objectives:

• Clearly state the specific objectives or aims of your research.
• Ensure that the objectives are clear, focused, and aligned with the research problem.

6. Methodology:

• Describe the research design and methodology you plan to use.
• Explain the data collection methods, instruments, and analysis techniques.
• Justify why the chosen methods are appropriate for your research.

7. Timeline:

8. Resources:

• Explain how you will acquire or utilize these resources effectively.

9. Ethical Considerations:

• If applicable, explain how you will ensure informed consent and protect the privacy of research participants.

10. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

11. References:

12. Appendices:

Research Proposal Template

Here’s a template for a research proposal:

1. Introduction:

2. Literature Review:

3. Research Objectives:

4. Methodology:

5. Timeline:

6. Resources:

7. Ethical Considerations:

8. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

9. References:

10. Appendices:

Research Proposal Sample

Title: The Impact of Online Education on Student Learning Outcomes: A Comparative Study

1. Introduction

Online education has gained significant prominence in recent years, especially due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This research proposal aims to investigate the impact of online education on student learning outcomes by comparing them with traditional face-to-face instruction. The study will explore various aspects of online education, such as instructional methods, student engagement, and academic performance, to provide insights into the effectiveness of online learning.

2. Objectives

The main objectives of this research are as follows:

• To compare student learning outcomes between online and traditional face-to-face education.
• To examine the factors influencing student engagement in online learning environments.
• To assess the effectiveness of different instructional methods employed in online education.
• To identify challenges and opportunities associated with online education and suggest recommendations for improvement.

3. Methodology

3.1 Study Design

This research will utilize a mixed-methods approach to gather both quantitative and qualitative data. The study will include the following components:

3.2 Participants

The research will involve undergraduate students from two universities, one offering online education and the other providing face-to-face instruction. A total of 500 students (250 from each university) will be selected randomly to participate in the study.

3.3 Data Collection

The research will employ the following data collection methods:

• Quantitative: Pre- and post-assessments will be conducted to measure students’ learning outcomes. Data on student demographics and academic performance will also be collected from university records.
• Qualitative: Focus group discussions and individual interviews will be conducted with students to gather their perceptions and experiences regarding online education.

3.4 Data Analysis

Quantitative data will be analyzed using statistical software, employing descriptive statistics, t-tests, and regression analysis. Qualitative data will be transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically to identify recurring patterns and themes.

4. Ethical Considerations

The study will adhere to ethical guidelines, ensuring the privacy and confidentiality of participants. Informed consent will be obtained, and participants will have the right to withdraw from the study at any time.

5. Significance and Expected Outcomes

This research will contribute to the existing literature by providing empirical evidence on the impact of online education on student learning outcomes. The findings will help educational institutions and policymakers make informed decisions about incorporating online learning methods and improving the quality of online education. Moreover, the study will identify potential challenges and opportunities related to online education and offer recommendations for enhancing student engagement and overall learning outcomes.

6. Timeline

The proposed research will be conducted over a period of 12 months, including data collection, analysis, and report writing.

The estimated budget for this research includes expenses related to data collection, software licenses, participant compensation, and research assistance. A detailed budget breakdown will be provided in the final research plan.

8. Conclusion

This research proposal aims to investigate the impact of online education on student learning outcomes through a comparative study with traditional face-to-face instruction. By exploring various dimensions of online education, this research will provide valuable insights into the effectiveness and challenges associated with online learning. The findings will contribute to the ongoing discourse on educational practices and help shape future strategies for maximizing student learning outcomes in online education settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How to choose an Appropriate Method for Research?

How To Write A Proposal – Step By Step Guide...

How To Write A Grant Proposal – Step-by-Step...

Proposal – Types, Examples, and Writing Guide

How To Write A Business Proposal – Step-by-Step...

Business Proposal – Templates, Examples and Guide

Illustration by James Round

How to plan a research project

Whether for a paper or a thesis, define your question, review the work of others – and leave yourself open to discovery.

by Brooke Harrington   + BIO

is professor of sociology at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire. Her research has won international awards both for scholarly quality and impact on public life. She has published dozens of articles and three books, most recently the bestseller Capital without Borders (2016), now translated into five languages.

Edited by Sam Haselby

Need to know

‘When curiosity turns to serious matters, it’s called research.’ – From Aphorisms (1880-1905) by Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

Planning research projects is a time-honoured intellectual exercise: one that requires both creativity and sharp analytical skills. The purpose of this Guide is to make the process systematic and easy to understand. While there is a great deal of freedom and discovery involved – from the topics you choose, to the data and methods you apply – there are also some norms and constraints that obtain, no matter what your academic level or field of study. For those in high school through to doctoral students, and from art history to archaeology, research planning involves broadly similar steps, including: formulating a question, developing an argument or predictions based on previous research, then selecting the information needed to answer your question.

Some of this might sound self-evident but, as you’ll find, research requires a different way of approaching and using information than most of us are accustomed to in everyday life. That is why I include orienting yourself to knowledge-creation as an initial step in the process. This is a crucial and underappreciated phase in education, akin to making the transition from salaried employment to entrepreneurship: suddenly, you’re on your own, and that requires a new way of thinking about your work.

What follows is a distillation of what I’ve learned about this process over 27 years as a professional social scientist. It reflects the skills that my own professors imparted in the sociology doctoral programme at Harvard, as well as what I learned later on as a research supervisor for Ivy League PhD and MA students, and then as the author of award-winning scholarly books and articles. It can be adapted to the demands of both short projects (such as course term papers) and long ones, such as a thesis.

At its simplest, research planning involves the four distinct steps outlined below: orienting yourself to knowledge-creation; defining your research question; reviewing previous research on your question; and then choosing relevant data to formulate your own answers. Because the focus of this Guide is on planning a research project, as opposed to conducting a research project, this section won’t delve into the details of data-collection or analysis; those steps happen after you plan the project. In addition, the topic is vast: year-long doctoral courses are devoted to data and analysis. Instead, the fourth part of this section will outline some basic strategies you could use in planning a data-selection and analysis process appropriate to your research question.

Step 1: Orient yourself

Planning and conducting research requires you to make a transition, from thinking like a consumer of information to thinking like a producer of information. That sounds simple, but it’s actually a complex task. As a practical matter, this means putting aside the mindset of a student, which treats knowledge as something created by other people. As students, we are often passive receivers of knowledge: asked to do a specified set of readings, then graded on how well we reproduce what we’ve read.

Researchers, however, must take on an active role as knowledge producers . Doing research requires more of you than reading and absorbing what other people have written: you have to engage in a dialogue with it. That includes arguing with previous knowledge and perhaps trying to show that ideas we have accepted as given are actually wrong or incomplete. For example, rather than simply taking in the claims of an author you read, you’ll need to draw out the implications of those claims: if what the author is saying is true, what else does that suggest must be true? What predictions could you make based on the author’s claims?

In other words, rather than treating a reading as a source of truth – even if it comes from a revered source, such as Plato or Marie Curie – this orientation step asks you to treat the claims you read as provisional and subject to interrogation. That is one of the great pieces of wisdom that science and philosophy can teach us: that the biggest advances in human understanding have been made not by being correct about trivial things, but by being wrong in an interesting way . For example, Albert Einstein was wrong about quantum mechanics, but his arguments about it with his fellow physicist Niels Bohr have led to some of the biggest breakthroughs in science, even a century later.

Step 2: Define your research question

Students often give this step cursory attention, but experienced researchers know that formulating a good question is sometimes the most difficult part of the research planning process. That is because the precise language of the question frames the rest of the project. It’s therefore important to pose the question carefully, in a way that’s both possible to answer and likely to yield interesting results. Of course, you must choose a question that interests you, but that’s only the beginning of what’s likely to be an iterative process: most researchers come back to this step repeatedly, modifying their questions in light of previous research, resource limitations and other considerations.

Researchers face limits in terms of time and money. They, like everyone else, have to pose research questions that they can plausibly answer given the constraints they face. For example, it would be inadvisable to frame a project around the question ‘What are the roots of the Arab-Israeli conflict?’ if you have only a week to develop an answer and no background on that topic. That’s not to limit your imagination: you can come up with any question you’d like. But it typically does require some creativity to frame a question that you can answer well – that is, by investigating thoroughly and providing new insights – within the limits you face.

In addition to being interesting to you, and feasible within your resource constraints, the third and most important characteristic of a ‘good’ research topic is whether it allows you to create new knowledge. It might turn out that your question has already been asked and answered to your satisfaction: if so, you’ll find out in the next step of this process. On the other hand, you might come up with a research question that hasn’t been addressed previously. Before you get too excited about breaking uncharted ground, consider this: a lot of potentially researchable questions haven’t been studied for good reason ; they might have answers that are trivial or of very limited interest. This could include questions such as ‘Why does the area of a circle equal π r²?’ or ‘Did winter conditions affect Napoleon’s plans to invade Russia?’ Of course, you might be able to make the argument that a seemingly trivial question is actually vitally important, but you must be prepared to back that up with convincing evidence. The exercise in the ‘Learn More’ section below will help you think through some of these issues.

Finally, scholarly research questions must in some way lead to new and distinctive insights. For example, lots of people have studied gender roles in sports teams; what can you ask that hasn’t been asked before? Reinventing the wheel is the number-one no-no in this endeavour. That’s why the next step is so important: reviewing previous research on your topic. Depending on what you find in that step, you might need to revise your research question; iterating between your question and the existing literature is a normal process. But don’t worry: it doesn’t go on forever. In fact, the iterations taper off – and your research question stabilises – as you develop a firm grasp of the current state of knowledge on your topic.

Step 3: Review previous research

In academic research, from articles to books, it’s common to find a section called a ‘literature review’. The purpose of that section is to describe the state of the art in knowledge on the research question that a project has posed. It demonstrates that researchers have thoroughly and systematically reviewed the relevant findings of previous studies on their topic, and that they have something novel to contribute.

Your own research project should include something like this, even if it’s a high-school term paper. In the research planning process, you’ll want to list at least half a dozen bullet points stating the major findings on your topic by other people. In relation to those findings, you should be able to specify where your project could provide new and necessary insights. There are two basic rhetorical positions one can take in framing the novelty-plus-importance argument required of academic research:

• Position 1 requires you to build on or extend a set of existing ideas; that means saying something like: ‘Person A has argued that X is true about gender; this implies Y, which has not yet been tested. My project will test Y, and if I find evidence to support it, that will change the way we understand gender.’
• Position 2 is to argue that there is a gap in existing knowledge, either because previous research has reached conflicting conclusions or has failed to consider something important. For example, one could say that research on middle schoolers and gender has been limited by being conducted primarily in coeducational environments, and that findings might differ dramatically if research were conducted in more schools where the student body was all-male or all-female.

Your overall goal in this step of the process is to show that your research will be part of a larger conversation: that is, how your project flows from what’s already known, and how it advances, extends or challenges that existing body of knowledge. That will be the contribution of your project, and it constitutes the motivation for your research.

Two things are worth mentioning about your search for sources of relevant previous research. First, you needn’t look only at studies on your precise topic. For example, if you want to study gender-identity formation in schools, you shouldn’t restrict yourself to studies of schools; the empirical setting (schools) is secondary to the larger social process that interests you (how people form gender identity). That process occurs in many different settings, so cast a wide net. Second, be sure to use legitimate sources – meaning publications that have been through some sort of vetting process, whether that involves peer review (as with academic journal articles you might find via Google Scholar) or editorial review (as you’d find in well-known mass media publications, such as The Economist or The Washington Post ). What you’ll want to avoid is using unvetted sources such as personal blogs or Wikipedia. Why? Because anybody can write anything in those forums, and there is no way to know – unless you’re already an expert – if the claims you find there are accurate. Often, they’re not.

Step 4: Choose your data and methods

Whatever your research question is, eventually you’ll need to consider which data source and analytical strategy are most likely to provide the answers you’re seeking. One starting point is to consider whether your question would be best addressed by qualitative data (such as interviews, observations or historical records), quantitative data (such as surveys or census records) or some combination of both. Your ideas about data sources will, in turn, suggest options for analytical methods.

You might need to collect your own data, or you might find everything you need readily available in an existing dataset someone else has created. A great place to start is with a research librarian: university libraries always have them and, at public universities, those librarians can work with the public, including people who aren’t affiliated with the university. If you don’t happen to have a public university and its library close at hand, an ordinary public library can still be a good place to start: the librarians are often well versed in accessing data sources that might be relevant to your study, such as the census, or historical archives, or the Survey of Consumer Finances.

Because your task at this point is to plan research, rather than conduct it, the purpose of this step is not to commit you irrevocably to a course of action. Instead, your goal here is to think through a feasible approach to answering your research question. You’ll need to find out, for example, whether the data you want exist; if not, do you have a realistic chance of gathering the data yourself, or would it be better to modify your research question? In terms of analysis, would your strategy require you to apply statistical methods? If so, do you have those skills? If not, do you have time to learn them, or money to hire a research assistant to run the analysis for you?

Please be aware that qualitative methods in particular are not the casual undertaking they might appear to be. Many people make the mistake of thinking that only quantitative data and methods are scientific and systematic, while qualitative methods are just a fancy way of saying: ‘I talked to some people, read some old newspapers, and drew my own conclusions.’ Nothing could be further from the truth. In the final section of this guide, you’ll find some links to resources that will provide more insight on standards and procedures governing qualitative research, but suffice it to say: there are rules about what constitutes legitimate evidence and valid analytical procedure for qualitative data, just as there are for quantitative data.

Circle back and consider revising your initial plans

As you work through these four steps in planning your project, it’s perfectly normal to circle back and revise. Research planning is rarely a linear process. It’s also common for new and unexpected avenues to suggest themselves. As the sociologist Thorstein Veblen wrote in 1908 : ‘The outcome of any serious research can only be to make two questions grow where only one grew before.’ That’s as true of research planning as it is of a completed project. Try to enjoy the horizons that open up for you in this process, rather than becoming overwhelmed; the four steps, along with the two exercises that follow, will help you focus your plan and make it manageable.

Key points – How to plan a research project

• Planning a research project is essential no matter your academic level or field of study. There is no one ‘best’ way to design research, but there are certain guidelines that can be helpfully applied across disciplines.
• Orient yourself to knowledge-creation. Make the shift from being a consumer of information to being a producer of information.
• Define your research question. Your question frames the rest of your project, sets the scope, and determines the kinds of answers you can find.
• Review previous research on your question. Survey the existing body of relevant knowledge to ensure that your research will be part of a larger conversation.
• Choose your data and methods. For instance, will you be collecting qualitative data, via interviews, or numerical data, via surveys?
• Circle back and consider revising your initial plans. Expect your research question in particular to undergo multiple rounds of refinement as you learn more about your topic.

Good research questions tend to beget more questions. This can be frustrating for those who want to get down to business right away. Try to make room for the unexpected: this is usually how knowledge advances. Many of the most significant discoveries in human history have been made by people who were looking for something else entirely. There are ways to structure your research planning process without over-constraining yourself; the two exercises below are a start, and you can find further methods in the Links and Books section.

The following exercise provides a structured process for advancing your research project planning. After completing it, you’ll be able to do the following:

• describe clearly and concisely the question you’ve chosen to study
• summarise the state of the art in knowledge about the question, and where your project could contribute new insight
• identify the best strategy for gathering and analysing relevant data

In other words, the following provides a systematic means to establish the building blocks of your research project.

Exercise 1: Definition of research question and sources

This exercise prompts you to select and clarify your general interest area, develop a research question, and investigate sources of information. The annotated bibliography will also help you refine your research question so that you can begin the second assignment, a description of the phenomenon you wish to study.

Jot down a few bullet points in response to these two questions, with the understanding that you’ll probably go back and modify your answers as you begin reading other studies relevant to your topic:

• What will be the general topic of your paper?
• What will be the specific topic of your paper?

b) Research question(s)

Use the following guidelines to frame a research question – or questions – that will drive your analysis. As with Part 1 above, you’ll probably find it necessary to change or refine your research question(s) as you complete future assignments.

• Your question should be phrased so that it can’t be answered with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
• Your question should have more than one plausible answer.
• Your question should draw relationships between two or more concepts; framing the question in terms of How? or What? often works better than asking Why ?

c) Annotated bibliography

Most or all of your background information should come from two sources: scholarly books and journals, or reputable mass media sources. You might be able to access journal articles electronically through your library, using search engines such as JSTOR and Google Scholar. This can save you a great deal of time compared with going to the library in person to search periodicals. General news sources, such as those accessible through LexisNexis, are acceptable, but should be cited sparingly, since they don’t carry the same level of credibility as scholarly sources. As discussed above, unvetted sources such as blogs and Wikipedia should be avoided, because the quality of the information they provide is unreliable and often misleading.

To create an annotated bibliography, provide the following information for at least 10 sources relevant to your specific topic, using the format suggested below.

Name of author(s):

Publication date:

Title of book, chapter, or article:

If a chapter or article, title of journal or book where they appear:

Brief description of this work, including main findings and methods ( c 75 words):

Summary of how this work contributes to your project ( c 75 words):

Brief description of the implications of this work ( c 25 words):

Identify any gap or controversy in knowledge this work points up, and how your project could address those problems ( c 50 words):

Exercise 2: Towards an analysis

Develop a short statement ( c 250 words) about the kind of data that would be useful to address your research question, and how you’d analyse it. Some questions to consider in writing this statement include:

• What are the central concepts or variables in your project? Offer a brief definition of each.
• Do any data sources exist on those concepts or variables, or would you need to collect data?
• Of the analytical strategies you could apply to that data, which would be the most appropriate to answer your question? Which would be the most feasible for you? Consider at least two methods, noting their advantages or disadvantages for your project.

Links & books

One of the best texts ever written about planning and executing research comes from a source that might be unexpected: a 60-year-old work on urban planning by a self-trained scholar. The classic book The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961) by Jane Jacobs (available complete and free of charge via this link ) is worth reading in its entirety just for the pleasure of it. But the final 20 pages – a concluding chapter titled ‘The Kind of Problem a City Is’ – are really about the process of thinking through and investigating a problem. Highly recommended as a window into the craft of research.

Jacobs’s text references an essay on advancing human knowledge by the mathematician Warren Weaver. At the time, Weaver was director of the Rockefeller Foundation, in charge of funding basic research in the natural and medical sciences. Although the essay is titled ‘A Quarter Century in the Natural Sciences’ (1960) and appears at first blush to be merely a summation of one man’s career, it turns out to be something much bigger and more interesting: a meditation on the history of human beings seeking answers to big questions about the world. Weaver goes back to the 17th century to trace the origins of systematic research thinking, with enthusiasm and vivid anecdotes that make the process come alive. The essay is worth reading in its entirety, and is available free of charge via this link .

For those seeking a more in-depth, professional-level discussion of the logic of research design, the political scientist Harvey Starr provides insight in a compact format in the article ‘Cumulation from Proper Specification: Theory, Logic, Research Design, and “Nice” Laws’ (2005). Starr reviews the ‘research triad’, consisting of the interlinked considerations of formulating a question, selecting relevant theories and applying appropriate methods. The full text of the article, published in the scholarly journal Conflict Management and Peace Science , is available, free of charge, via this link .

Finally, the book Getting What You Came For (1992) by Robert Peters is not only an outstanding guide for anyone contemplating graduate school – from the application process onward – but it also includes several excellent chapters on planning and executing research, applicable across a wide variety of subject areas. It was an invaluable resource for me 25 years ago, and it remains in print with good reason; I recommend it to all my students, particularly Chapter 16 (‘The Thesis Topic: Finding It’), Chapter 17 (‘The Thesis Proposal’) and Chapter 18 (‘The Thesis: Writing It’).

Goals and motivation

How to do mental time travel

Feeling overwhelmed by the present moment? Find a connection to the longer view and a wiser perspective on what matters

by Richard Fisher

How to cope with climate anxiety

It’s normal to feel troubled by the climate crisis. These practices can help keep your response manageable and constructive

by Lucia Tecuta

Emerging therapies

How to use cooking as a form of therapy

No matter your culinary skills, spend some reflective time in the kitchen to nourish and renew your sense of self

by Charlotte Hastings

How to Write a PhD Research Proposal

• Applying to a PhD
• A research proposal summarises your intended research.
• Your research proposal is used to confirm you understand the topic, and that the university has the expertise to support your study.
• The length of a research proposal varies. It is usually specified by either the programme requirements or the supervisor upon request. 1500 to 3500 words is common.
• The typical research proposal structure consists of: Title, Abstract, Background and Rationale, Research Aims and Objectives, Research Design and Methodology, Timetable, and a Bibliography.

What is a Research Proposal?

A research proposal is a supporting document that may be required when applying to a research degree. It summarises your intended research by outlining what your research questions are, why they’re important to your field and what knowledge gaps surround your topic. It also outlines your research in terms of your aims, methods and proposed timetable .

What Is It Used for and Why Is It Important?

A research proposal will be used to:

• Confirm whether you understand the topic and can communicate complex ideas.
• Confirm whether the university has adequate expertise to support you in your research topic.
• Apply for funding or research grants to external bodies.

How Long Should a PhD Research Proposal Be?

Some universities will specify a word count all students will need to adhere to. You will typically find these in the description of the PhD listing. If they haven’t stated a word count limit, you should contact the potential supervisor to clarify whether there are any requirements. If not, aim for 1500 to 3500 words (3 to 7 pages).

Your title should indicate clearly what your research question is. It needs to be simple and to the point; if the reader needs to read further into your proposal to understand your question, your working title isn’t clear enough.

Directly below your title, state the topic your research question relates to. Whether you include this information at the top of your proposal or insert a dedicated title page is your choice and will come down to personal preference.

2. Abstract

If your research proposal is over 2000 words, consider providing an abstract. Your abstract should summarise your question, why it’s important to your field and how you intend to answer it; in other words, explain your research context.

Only include crucial information in this section – 250 words should be sufficient to get across your main points.

3. Background & Rationale

First, specify which subject area your research problem falls in. This will help set the context of your study and will help the reader anticipate the direction of your proposed research.

Following this, include a literature review . A literature review summarises the existing knowledge which surrounds your research topic. This should include a discussion of the theories, models and bodies of text which directly relate to your research problem. As well as discussing the information available, discuss those which aren’t. In other words, identify what the current gaps in knowledge are and discuss how this will influence your research. Your aim here is to convince the potential supervisor and funding providers of why your intended research is worth investing time and money into.

Last, discuss the key debates and developments currently at the centre of your research area.

4. Research Aims & Objectives

Identify the aims and objectives of your research. The aims are the problems your project intends to solve; the objectives are the measurable steps and outcomes required to achieve the aim.

In outlining your aims and objectives, you will need to explain why your proposed research is worth exploring. Consider these aspects:

• Will your research solve a problem?
• Will your research address a current gap in knowledge?
• Will your research have any social or practical benefits?

If you fail to address the above questions, it’s unlikely they will accept your proposal – all PhD research projects must show originality and value to be considered.

5. Research Design and Methodology

The following structure is recommended when discussing your research design:

• Sample/Population – Discuss your sample size, target populations, specimen types etc.
• Methods – What research methods have you considered, how did you evaluate them and how did you decide on your chosen one?
• Data Collection – How are you going to collect and validate your data? Are there any limitations?
• Data Analysis – How are you going to interpret your results and obtain a meaningful conclusion from them?
• Ethical Considerations – Are there any potential implications associated with your research approach? This could either be to research participants or to your field as a whole on the outcome of your findings (i.e. if you’re researching a particularly controversial area). How are you going to monitor for these implications and what types of preventive steps will you need to put into place?

6. Timetable

We’ve outlined the various stages of a PhD and the approximate duration of a PhD programme which you can refer to when designing your own research study.

7. Bibliography

Plagiarism is taken seriously across all academic levels, but even more so for doctorates. Therefore, ensure you reference the existing literature you have used in writing your PhD proposal. Besides this, try to adopt the same referencing style as the University you’re applying to uses. You can easily find this information in the PhD Thesis formatting guidelines published on the University’s website.

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

Questions & Answers

Here are answers to some of the most common questions we’re asked about the Research Proposal:

Can You Change a Research Proposal?

Yes, your PhD research proposal outlines the start of your project only. It’s well accepted that the direction of your research will develop with time, therefore, you can revise it at later dates.

Can the Potential Supervisor Review My Draft Proposal?

Whether the potential supervisor will review your draft will depend on the individual. However, it is highly advisable that you at least attempt to discuss your draft with them. Even if they can’t review it, they may provide you with useful information regarding their department’s expertise which could help shape your PhD proposal. For example, you may amend your methodology should you come to learn that their laboratory is better equipped for an alternative method.

How Should I Structure and Format My Proposal?

Ensure you follow the same order as the headings given above. This is the most logical structure and will be the order your proposed supervisor will expect.

Most universities don’t provide formatting requirements for research proposals on the basis that they are a supporting document only, however, we recommend that you follow the same format they require for their PhD thesis submissions. This will give your reader familiarity and their guidelines should be readily available on their website.

Last, try to have someone within the same academic field or discipline area to review your proposal. The key is to confirm that they understand the importance of your work and how you intend to execute it. If they don’t, it’s likely a sign you need to rewrite some of your sections to be more coherent.

Browse PhDs Now

Join thousands of students.

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

Princeton Correspondents on Undergraduate Research

How to Write a Research Proposal as an Undergrad

As I just passed the deadline for my junior independent work (JIW), I wanted to explore strategies that could be helpful in composing a research proposal. In the chemistry department, JIW usually involves lab work and collecting raw data. However, this year, because of the pandemic, there is limited benchwork involved and most of the emphasis has shifted to designing a research proposal that would segue into one’s senior thesis. So far, I have only had one prior experience composing a research proposal, and it was from a virtual summer research program in my department. For this program, I was able to write a proposal on modifying a certain chemical inhibitor that could be used in reducing cancer cell proliferation. Using that experience as a guide, I will outline the steps I followed when I wrote my proposal. (Most of these steps are oriented towards research in the natural sciences, but there are many aspects common to research in other fields).

The first step is usually choosing a topic . This can be assigned to you by the principal investigator for the lab or a research mentor if you have one. For me, it was my research mentor, a graduate student in our lab, who helped me in selecting a field of query for my proposal. When I chose the lab I wanted to be part of for my summer project (with my JIW and senior thesis in mind) , I knew the general area of research I wanted to be involved in. But, usually within a lab, there are many projects that graduate students and post-docs work on within that specific area. Hence, it is important to identify a mentor with specific projects you want to be involved in for your own research. Once you choose a mentor, you can talk to them about formulating a research proposal based on the direction they plan to take their research in and how you can be involved in a similar project. Usually, mentors assign you one to three papers related to your research topic – a review paper that summarizes many research articles and one to two research articles with similar findings and methodology. In my case, the papers involved a review article on the role of the chemical inhibitor I was investigating along with articles on inhibitor design and mechanism of action.  

The next step is to perform a literature review to broadly assess previous work in your research topic, using the articles assigned by your mentor. At this stage, for my proposal, I was trying to know as much about my research area from these papers as well as the articles cited in them. Here, it is helpful to use a reference management software such as Zotero and Mendeley to organize your notes along with all the articles you look into for a bibliography. 

After going through your literature review, you can start thinking about identifying questions that remain to be answered in that field. For my JIW, I found some good ideas in the discussion section of the papers I had read where authors discussed what could be done in future research projects. One discussion section, for example, suggested ways to complement in-vitro experiments (outside of a living organism) with in-vivo ones (inside a living organism) . Reviewing the discussion section is a relatively straightforward way to formulate your own hypothesis. Alternatively, you could look at the papers’ raw data and find that the authors’ conclusions need to be revisited (this might require a critical review of the paper and the supplementary materials) or you could work on improving the paper’s methodology and optimizing its experiments. Furthermore, you might think about combining ideas from different papers or trying to reconcile differing conclusions reached by them.

The next step is developing a general outline ; deciding on what you want to cover in your proposal and how it is going to be structured. Here, you should try hard to limit the scope of your proposal to what you can realistically do for your senior thesis. As a junior or a senior, you will only be working with your mentor for a limited amount of time. Hence, it is not possible to plan long term experiments that would be appropriate for graduate students or post-docs in the lab. (For my summer project, there was not a follow up experiment involved, so I was able to think about possible experiments without the time or equipment constraints that would need to be considered for a JIW). Thus, your proposal should mostly focus on what you think is feasible given your timeline. 

Below are two final considerations. It is important that your research proposal outlines how you plan to collect your own data , analyze it and compare it with other papers in your field. For a research project based on a proposal, you need only establish if your premises/hypotheses are true or false. To do that, you need to formulate questions you can answer by collecting your own data, and this is where experiments come in. My summer project had three specific aims and each one was in the form of a question.

It is important to keep in mind in your proposal the experiments you can perform efficiently on your own – the experimental skills you want to master as an undergraduate. In my view, it is better to learn one to two skills very well than having surface-level knowledge of many. This is because the nature of research has been very specialized in each field that there is limited room for broad investigations. This does not mean your proposal should be solely based on things you can test by yourself (although it might be preferable to put more emphasis there). If your proposal involves experiments beyond what you can learn to do in a year or two, you can think of asking for help from an expert in your lab. 

A research proposal at the undergraduate level is an engaging exercise on coming up with your own questions on your chosen field. There is much leeway as an undergraduate to experiment within your field and think out of the box. In many ways, you will learn how to learn and how to formulate questions for any task you encounter in the future. Whether or not you want to be involved in research, it is an experience common to all Princeton students that you take with you after graduation.

In this post, I have described the basic elements of a natural science research proposal and my approach to writing one. Although the steps above are not comprehensive, I am hopeful they offer guidance you can adapt when you write your own proposal in the future.

— Yodahe Gebreegziabher, Natural Sciences Correspondent

Share this:

• Share on Tumblr

How to write your research proposal

A key part of your application is your research proposal. Whether you are applying for a self-funded or studentship you should follow the guidance below.

If you are looking specifically for advice on writing your PhD by published work research proposal, read our guide .

You are encouraged to contact us to discuss the availability of supervision in your area of research before you make a formal application, by  visiting our areas of research .

What is your research proposal used for and why is it important?

• It is used to establish whether there is expertise to support your proposed area of research
• It forms part of the assessment of your application
• The research proposal you submit as part of your application is just the starting point, as your ideas evolve your proposed research is likely to change

How long should my research proposal be?

It should be 2,000–3,500 words (4-7 pages) long.

What should be included in my research proposal?

Your proposal should include the following:

• your title should give a clear indication of your proposed research approach or key question

2. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

You should include:

• the background and issues of your proposed research
• identify your discipline
• a short literature review
• a summary of key debates and developments in the field

3. RESEARCH QUESTION(S)

You should formulate these clearly, giving an explanation as to what problems and issues are to be explored and why they are worth exploring

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

You should provide an outline of:

• the theoretical resources to be drawn on
• the research approach (theoretical framework)
• the research methods appropriate for the proposed research
• a discussion of advantages as well as limits of particular approaches and methods

5. PLAN OF WORK & TIME SCHEDULE

You should include an outline of the various stages and corresponding time lines for developing and implementing the research, including writing up your thesis.

For  full-time study  your research should be completed within three years, with writing up completed in the fourth year of registration.

For  part-time study  your research should be completed within six years, with writing up completed by the eighth year.

6. BIBLIOGRAPHY

• a list of references to key articles and texts discussed within your research proposal
• a selection of sources appropriate to the proposed research

Related pages

Fees and funding.

How much will it cost to study a research degree?

Research degrees

Find out if you can apply for a Research Degree at the University of Westminster.

Research degree by distance learning

Find out about Research Degree distance learning options at the University of Westminster.

We use cookies to ensure the best experience on our website.

By accepting you agree to cookies being stored on your device.

Some of these cookies are essential to the running of the site, while others help us to improve your experience.

Functional cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility.

Analytics cookies help us improve our website based on user needs by collecting information, which does not directly identify anyone.

Marketing cookies send information on your visit to third parties so that they can make their advertising more relevant to you when you visit other websites.

We use essential cookies to make Venngage work. By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.

Manage Cookies

Cookies and similar technologies collect certain information about how you’re using our website. Some of them are essential, and without them you wouldn’t be able to use Venngage. But others are optional, and you get to choose whether we use them or not.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are always on, as they’re essential for making Venngage work, and making it safe. Without these cookies, services you’ve asked for can’t be provided.

Show cookie providers

• Google Login

Functionality Cookies

These cookies help us provide enhanced functionality and personalisation, and remember your settings. They may be set by us or by third party providers.

Performance Cookies

These cookies help us analyze how many people are using Venngage, where they come from and how they're using it. If you opt out of these cookies, we can’t get feedback to make Venngage better for you and all our users.

• Google Analytics

Targeting Cookies

These cookies are set by our advertising partners to track your activity and show you relevant Venngage ads on other sites as you browse the internet.

• Google Tag Manager
• Infographics
• Daily Infographics
• Popular Templates
• Accessibility
• Graphic Design
• Graphs and Charts
• Data Visualization
• Human Resources
• Beginner Guides

Blog Business How to Write a Research Proposal: A Step-by-Step

How to Write a Research Proposal: A Step-by-Step

Written by: Danesh Ramuthi Nov 29, 2023

A research proposal is a structured outline for a planned study on a specific topic. It serves as a roadmap, guiding researchers through the process of converting their research idea into a feasible project. 

The aim of a research proposal is multifold: it articulates the research problem, establishes a theoretical framework, outlines the research methodology and highlights the potential significance of the study. Importantly, it’s a critical tool for scholars seeking grant funding or approval for their research projects.

Crafting a good research proposal requires not only understanding your research topic and methodological approaches but also the ability to present your ideas clearly and persuasively. Explore Venngage’s Proposal Maker and Research Proposals Templates to begin your journey in writing a compelling research proposal.

What to include in a research proposal?

In a research proposal, include a clear statement of your research question or problem, along with an explanation of its significance. This should be followed by a literature review that situates your proposed study within the context of existing research. 

Your proposal should also outline the research methodology, detailing how you plan to conduct your study, including data collection and analysis methods.

Additionally, include a theoretical framework that guides your research approach, a timeline or research schedule, and a budget if applicable. It’s important to also address the anticipated outcomes and potential implications of your study. A well-structured research proposal will clearly communicate your research objectives, methods and significance to the readers.

How to format a research proposal?

Formatting a research proposal involves adhering to a structured outline to ensure clarity and coherence. While specific requirements may vary, a standard research proposal typically includes the following elements:

• Title Page: Must include the title of your research proposal, your name and affiliations. The title should be concise and descriptive of your proposed research.
• Abstract: A brief summary of your proposal, usually not exceeding 250 words. It should highlight the research question, methodology and the potential impact of the study.
• Introduction: Introduces your research question or problem, explains its significance, and states the objectives of your study.
• Literature review: Here, you contextualize your research within existing scholarship, demonstrating your knowledge of the field and how your research will contribute to it.
• Methodology: Outline your research methods, including how you will collect and analyze data. This section should be detailed enough to show the feasibility and thoughtfulness of your approach.
• Timeline: Provide an estimated schedule for your research, breaking down the process into stages with a realistic timeline for each.
• Budget (if applicable): If your research requires funding, include a detailed budget outlining expected cost.
• References/Bibliography: List all sources referenced in your proposal in a consistent citation style.

How to write a research proposal in 11 steps?

Writing a research proposal template in structured steps ensures a comprehensive and coherent presentation of your research project. Let’s look at the explanation for each of the steps here:  

Step 1: Title and Abstract Step 2: Introduction Step 3: Research objectives Step 4: Literature review Step 5: Methodology Step 6: Timeline Step 7: Resources Step 8: Ethical considerations Step 9: Expected outcomes and significance Step 10: References Step 11: Appendices

Step 1: title and abstract.

Select a concise, descriptive title and write an abstract summarizing your research question, objectives, methodology and expected outcomes​​. The abstract should include your research question, the objectives you aim to achieve, the methodology you plan to employ and the anticipated outcomes. 

Step 2: Introduction

In this section, introduce the topic of your research, emphasizing its significance and relevance to the field. Articulate the research problem or question in clear terms and provide background context, which should include an overview of previous research in the field.

Step 3: Research objectives

Here, you’ll need to outline specific, clear and achievable objectives that align with your research problem. These objectives should be well-defined, focused and measurable, serving as the guiding pillars for your study. They help in establishing what you intend to accomplish through your research and provide a clear direction for your investigation.

Step 4: Literature review

In this part, conduct a thorough review of existing literature related to your research topic. This involves a detailed summary of key findings and major contributions from previous research. Identify existing gaps in the literature and articulate how your research aims to fill these gaps. The literature review not only shows your grasp of the subject matter but also how your research will contribute new insights or perspectives to the field.

Step 5: Methodology

Describe the design of your research and the methodologies you will employ. This should include detailed information on data collection methods, instruments to be used and analysis techniques. Justify the appropriateness of these methods for your research​​.

Step 6: Timeline

Construct a detailed timeline that maps out the major milestones and activities of your research project. Break the entire research process into smaller, manageable tasks and assign realistic time frames to each. This timeline should cover everything from the initial research phase to the final submission, including periods for data collection, analysis and report writing. 

It helps in ensuring your project stays on track and demonstrates to reviewers that you have a well-thought-out plan for completing your research efficiently.

Step 7: Resources

Identify all the resources that will be required for your research, such as specific databases, laboratory equipment, software or funding. Provide details on how these resources will be accessed or acquired. 

If your research requires funding, explain how it will be utilized effectively to support various aspects of the project. 

Step 8: Ethical considerations

Address any ethical issues that may arise during your research. This is particularly important for research involving human subjects. Describe the measures you will take to ensure ethical standards are maintained, such as obtaining informed consent, ensuring participant privacy, and adhering to data protection regulations. 

Here, in this section you should reassure reviewers that you are committed to conducting your research responsibly and ethically.

Step 9: Expected outcomes and significance

Articulate the expected outcomes or results of your research. Explain the potential impact and significance of these outcomes, whether in advancing academic knowledge, influencing policy or addressing specific societal or practical issues. 

Step 10: References

Compile a comprehensive list of all the references cited in your proposal. Adhere to a consistent citation style (like APA or MLA) throughout your document. The reference section not only gives credit to the original authors of your sourced information but also strengthens the credibility of your proposal.

Step 11: Appendices

Include additional supporting materials that are pertinent to your research proposal. This can be survey questionnaires, interview guides, detailed data analysis plans or any supplementary information that supports the main text. 

Appendices provide further depth to your proposal, showcasing the thoroughness of your preparation.

Research proposal FAQs

1. how long should a research proposal be.

The length of a research proposal can vary depending on the requirements of the academic institution, funding body or specific guidelines provided. Generally, research proposals range from 500 to 1500 words or about one to a few pages long. It’s important to provide enough detail to clearly convey your research idea, objectives and methodology, while being concise. Always check

2. Why is the research plan pivotal to a research project?

The research plan is pivotal to a research project because it acts as a blueprint, guiding every phase of the study. It outlines the objectives, methodology, timeline and expected outcomes, providing a structured approach and ensuring that the research is systematically conducted. 

A well-crafted plan helps in identifying potential challenges, allocating resources efficiently and maintaining focus on the research goals. It is also essential for communicating the project’s feasibility and importance to stakeholders, such as funding bodies or academic supervisors.

Mastering how to write a research proposal is an essential skill for any scholar, whether in social and behavioral sciences, academic writing or any field requiring scholarly research. From this article, you have learned key components, from the literature review to the research design, helping you develop a persuasive and well-structured proposal.

Remember, a good research proposal not only highlights your proposed research and methodology but also demonstrates its relevance and potential impact.

For additional support, consider utilizing Venngage’s Proposal Maker and Research Proposals Templates , valuable tools in crafting a compelling proposal that stands out.

Whether it’s for grant funding, a research paper or a dissertation proposal, these resources can assist in transforming your research idea into a successful submission.

Discover popular designs

Infographic maker

Brochure maker

White paper online

Newsletter creator

Flyer maker

Timeline maker

Letterhead maker

Mind map maker

Ebook maker

University Libraries

• Research Guides
• Blackboard Learn
• Interlibrary Loan
• Study Rooms
• University of Arkansas

Choosing a Topic for a Research Paper or Presentation

• How Long Should Research Take?
• Getting Started
• Assigned topic?
• Choosing Resources to Support your Topic

Director for Research & Instruction

How Long Does Research Take?

How long the research process takes varies by:

• the nature of the assignment,  how well the topic is covered in 'the literature'* (i.e., books, journals and other sources), 
• what materials are available in our library or online, 
• the length of time allotted for the assignment and
• the expertise of the researcher (i.e., what you know about the topic).

Things to keep in mind:

Start early so that you can revise your strategy or your paper if necessary. Some topics will have a huge amount of material available, while some will have little.  If you need background material, subject encyclopedias may give more specific detail. Conducting research normally takes longer than you expect.

Frustration and backtracking are a normal part of the process. However, reference librarians can show you strategies that can save you time and can help you do your research more effectively.

Ask at the Help Desk, through Ask-us (chat), text to 479-385-0803 or email [email protected] for assistance.

You can use the Research Paper Wizard to help plan the sequence and find sources.

[email protected]

subject encyclopedias

Research Paper Wizard

*This is the published material about the topic. It is not "literature" as in fiction or drama, although there is literature about the field of literature, too.

• << Previous: Choosing Resources to Support your Topic
• Last Updated: Jan 8, 2024 10:05 AM
• URL: https://uark.libguides.com/choosetopic
• See us on Instagram
• Follow us on Twitter
• Phone: 479-575-4104

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.18(6); 2022 Jun

Ten simple rules for good research practice

Simon schwab.

1 Center for Reproducible Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

2 Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

Perrine Janiaud

3 Department of Clinical Research, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

Michael Dayan

4 Human Neuroscience Platform, Fondation Campus Biotech Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Valentin Amrhein

5 Department of Environmental Sciences, Zoology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

Radoslaw Panczak

6 Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

Patricia M. Palagi

7 SIB Training Group, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Lausanne, Switzerland

Lars G. Hemkens

8 Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

9 Meta-Research Innovation Center Berlin (METRIC-B), Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany

Meike Ramon

10 Applied Face Cognition Lab, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

Nicolas Rothen

11 Faculty of Psychology, UniDistance Suisse, Brig, Switzerland

Stephen Senn

12 Statistical Consultant, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Leonhard Held

This is a PLOS Computational Biology Methods paper.

Introduction

The lack of research reproducibility has caused growing concern across various scientific fields [ 1 – 5 ]. Today, there is widespread agreement, within and outside academia, that scientific research is suffering from a reproducibility crisis [ 6 , 7 ]. Researchers reach different conclusions—even when the same data have been processed—simply due to varied analytical procedures [ 8 , 9 ]. As we continue to recognize this problematic situation, some major causes of irreproducible research have been identified. This, in turn, provides the foundation for improvement by identifying and advocating for good research practices (GRPs). Indeed, powerful solutions are available, for example, preregistration of study protocols and statistical analysis plans, sharing of data and analysis code, and adherence to reporting guidelines. Although these and other best practices may facilitate reproducible research and increase trust in science, it remains the responsibility of researchers themselves to actively integrate them into their everyday research practices.

Contrary to ubiquitous specialized training, cross-disciplinary courses focusing on best practices to enhance the quality of research are lacking at universities and are urgently needed. The intersections between disciplines offer a space for peer evaluation, mutual learning, and sharing of best practices. In medical research, interdisciplinary work is inevitable. For example, conducting clinical trials requires experts with diverse backgrounds, including clinical medicine, pharmacology, biostatistics, evidence synthesis, nursing, and implementation science. Bringing researchers with diverse backgrounds and levels of experience together to exchange knowledge and learn about problems and solutions adds value and improves the quality of research.

The present selection of rules was based on our experiences with teaching GRP courses at the University of Zurich, our course participants’ feedback, and the views of a cross-disciplinary group of experts from within the Swiss Reproducibility Network ( www.swissrn.org ). The list is neither exhaustive, nor does it aim to address and systematically summarize the wide spectrum of issues including research ethics and legal aspects (e.g., related to misconduct, conflicts of interests, and scientific integrity). Instead, we focused on practical advice at the different stages of everyday research: from planning and execution to reporting of research. For a more comprehensive overview on GRPs, we point to the United Kingdom’s Medical Research Council’s guidelines [ 10 ] and the Swedish Research Council’s report [ 11 ]. While the discussion of the rules may predominantly focus on clinical research, much applies, in principle, to basic biomedical research and research in other domains as well.

The 10 proposed rules can serve multiple purposes: an introduction for researchers to relevant concepts to improve research quality, a primer for early-career researchers who participate in our GRP courses, or a starting point for lecturers who plan a GRP course at their own institutions. The 10 rules are grouped according to planning (5 rules), execution (3 rules), and reporting of research (2 rules); see Fig 1 . These principles can (and should) be implemented as a habit in everyday research, just like toothbrushing.

GRP, good research practices.

Research planning

Rule 1: specify your research question.

Coming up with a research question is not always simple and may take time. A successful study requires a narrow and clear research question. In evidence-based research, prior studies are assessed in a systematic and transparent way to identify a research gap for a new study that answers a question that matters [ 12 ]. Papers that provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of research in the field are particularly helpful—for example, systematic reviews. Perspective papers may also be useful, for example, there is a paper with the title “SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: The most important research questions.” However, a systematic assessment of research gaps deserves more attention than opinion-based publications.

In the next step, a vague research question should be further developed and refined. In clinical research and evidence-based medicine, there is an approach called population, intervention, comparator, outcome, and time frame (PICOT) with a set of criteria that can help framing a research question [ 13 ]. From a well-developed research question, subsequent steps will follow, which may include the exact definition of the population, the outcome, the data to be collected, and the sample size that is required. It may be useful to find out if other researchers find the idea interesting as well and whether it might promise a valuable contribution to the field. However, actively involving the public or the patients can be a more effective way to determine what research questions matter.

The level of details in a research question also depends on whether the planned research is confirmatory or exploratory. In contrast to confirmatory research, exploratory research does not require a well-defined hypothesis from the start. Some examples of exploratory experiments are those based on omics and multi-omics experiments (genomics, bulk RNA-Seq, single-cell, etc.) in systems biology and connectomics and whole-brain analyses in brain imaging. Both exploration and confirmation are needed in science, and it is helpful to understand their strengths and limitations [ 14 , 15 ].

Rule 2: Write and register a study protocol

In clinical research, registration of clinical trials has become a standard since the late 1990 and is now a legal requirement in many countries. Such studies require a study protocol to be registered, for example, with ClinicalTrials.gov, the European Clinical Trials Register, or the World Health Organization’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Similar effort has been implemented for registration of systematic reviews (PROSPERO). Study registration has also been proposed for observational studies [ 16 ] and more recently in preclinical animal research [ 17 ] and is now being advocated across disciplines under the term “preregistration” [ 18 , 19 ].

Study protocols typically document at minimum the research question and hypothesis, a description of the population, the targeted sample size, the inclusion/exclusion criteria, the study design, the data collection, the data processing and transformation, and the planned statistical analyses. The registration of study protocols reduces publication bias and hindsight bias and can safeguard honest research and minimize waste of research [ 20 – 22 ]. Registration ensures that studies can be scrutinized by comparing the reported research with what was actually planned and written in the protocol, and any discrepancies may indicate serious problems (e.g., outcome switching).

Note that registration does not mean that researchers have no flexibility to adapt the plan as needed. Indeed, new or more appropriate procedures may become available or known only after registration of a study. Therefore, a more detailed statistical analysis plan can be amended to the protocol before the data are observed or unblinded [ 23 , 24 ]. Likewise, registration does not exclude the possibility to conduct exploratory data analyses; however, they must be clearly reported as such.

To go even further, registered reports are a novel article type that incentivize high-quality research—irrespective of the ultimate study outcome [ 25 , 26 ]. With registered reports, peer-reviewers decide before anyone knows the results of the study, and they have a more active role in being able to influence the design and analysis of the study. Journals from various disciplines increasingly support registered reports [ 27 ].

Naturally, preregistration and registered reports also have their limitations and may not be appropriate in a purely hypothesis-generating (explorative) framework. Reports of exploratory studies should indeed not be molded into a confirmatory framework; appropriate rigorous reporting alternatives have been suggested and start to become implemented [ 28 , 29 ].

Rule 3: Justify your sample size

Early-career researchers in our GRP courses often identify sample size as an issue in their research. For example, they say that they work with a low number of samples due to slow growth of cells, or they have a limited number of patient tumor samples due to a rare disease. But if your sample size is too low, your study has a high risk of providing a false negative result (type II error). In other words, you are unlikely to find an effect even if there truly was an effect.

Unfortunately, there is more bad news with small studies. When an effect from a small study was selected for drawing conclusions because it was statistically significant, low power increases the probability that an effect size is overestimated [ 30 , 31 ]. The reason is that with low power, studies that due to sampling variation find larger (overestimated) effects are much more likely to be statistically significant than those that happen to find smaller (more realistic) effects [ 30 , 32 , 33 ]. Thus, in such situations, effect sizes are often overestimated. For the phenomenon that small studies often report more extreme results (in meta-analyses), the term “small-study effect” was introduced [ 34 ]. In any case, an underpowered study is a problematic study, no matter the outcome.

In conclusion, small sample sizes can undermine research, but when is a study too small? For one study, a total of 50 patients may be fine, but for another, 1,000 patients may be required. How large a study needs to be designed requires an appropriate sample size calculation. Appropriate sample size calculation ensures that enough data are collected to ensure sufficient statistical power (the probability to reject the null hypothesis when it is in fact false).

Low-powered studies can be avoided by performing a sample size calculation to find out the required sample size of the study. This requires specifying a primary outcome variable and the magnitude of effect you are interested in (among some other factors); in clinical research, this is often the minimal clinically relevant difference. The statistical power is often set at 80% or larger. A comprehensive list of packages for sample size calculation are available [ 35 ], among them the R package “pwr” [ 36 ]. There are also many online calculators available, for example, the University of Zurich’s “SampleSizeR” [ 37 ].

A worthwhile alternative for planning the sample size that puts less emphasis on null hypothesis testing is based on the desired precision of the study; for example, one can calculate the sample size that is necessary to obtain a desired width of a confidence interval for the targeted effect [ 38 – 40 ]. A general framework to sample size justification beyond a calculation-only approach has been proposed [ 41 ]. It is also worth mentioning that some study types have other requirements or need specific methods. In diagnostic testing, one would need to determine the anticipated minimal sensitivity or specificity; in prognostic research, the number of parameters that can be used to fit a prediction model given a fixed sample size should be specified. Designs can also be so complex that a simulation (Monte Carlo method) may be required.

Sample size calculations should be done under different assumptions, and the largest estimated sample size is often the safer bet than a best-case scenario. The calculated sample size should further be adjusted to allow for possible missing data. Due to the complexity of accurately calculating sample size, researchers should strongly consider consulting a statistician early in the study design process.

Rule 4: Write a data management plan

In 2020, 2 Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) papers in leading medical journals were retracted after major concerns about the data were raised [ 42 ]. Today, raw data are more often recognized as a key outcome of research along with the paper. Therefore, it is important to develop a strategy for the life cycle of data, including suitable infrastructure for long-term storage.

The data life cycle is described in a data management plan: a document that describes what data will be collected and how the data will be organized, stored, handled, and protected during and after the end of the research project. Several funders require a data management plan in grant submissions, and publishers like PLOS encourage authors to do so as well. The Wellcome Trust provides guidance in the development of a data management plan, including real examples from neuroimaging, genomics, and social sciences [ 43 ]. However, projects do not always allocate funding and resources to the actual implementation of the data management plan.

The Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) data principles promote maximal use of data and enable machines to access and reuse data with minimal human intervention [ 44 ]. FAIR principles require the data to be retained, preserved, and shared preferably with an immutable unique identifier and a clear usage license. Appropriate metadata will help other researchers (or machines) to discover, process, and understand the data. However, requesting researchers to fully comply with the FAIR data principles in every detail is an ambitious goal.

Multidisciplinary data repositories that support FAIR are, for example, Dryad (datadryad.org https://datadryad.org/ ), EUDAT ( www.eudat.eu ), OSF (osf.io https://osf.io/ ), and Zenodo (zenodo.org https://zenodo.org/ ). A number of institutional and field-specific repositories may also be suitable. However, sometimes, authors may not be able to make their data publicly available for legal or ethical reasons. In such cases, a data user agreement can indicate the conditions required to access the data. Journals highlight what are acceptable and what are unacceptable data access restrictions and often require a data availability statement.

Organizing the study artifacts in a structured way greatly facilitates the reuse of data and code within and outside the lab, enhancing collaborations and maximizing the research investment. Support and courses for data management plans are sometimes available at universities. Another 10 simple rules paper for creating a good data management plan is dedicated to this topic [ 45 ].

Rule 5: Reduce bias

Bias is a distorted view in favor of or against a particular idea. In statistics, bias is a systematic deviation of a statistical estimate from the (true) quantity it estimates. Bias can invalidate our conclusions, and the more bias there is, the less valid they are. For example, in clinical studies, bias may mislead us into reaching a causal conclusion that the difference in the outcomes was due to the intervention or the exposure. This is a big concern, and, therefore, the risk of bias is assessed in clinical trials [ 46 ] as well as in observational studies [ 47 , 48 ].

There are many different forms of bias that can occur in a study, and they may overlap (e.g., allocation bias and confounding bias) [ 49 ]. Bias can occur at different stages, for example, immortal time bias in the design of the study, information bias in the execution of the study, and publication bias in the reporting of research. Understanding bias allows us researchers to remain vigilant of potential sources of bias when peer-reviewing and designing own studies. We summarized some common types of bias and some preventive steps in Table 1 , but many other forms of bias exist; for a comprehensive overview, see the Oxford University’s Catalogue of Bias [ 50 ].

For a comprehensive collection, see catalogofbias.org .

Here are some noteworthy examples of study bias from the literature: An example of information bias was observed when in 1998 an alleged association between the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism was reported. Recall bias (a subtype of information bias) emerged when parents of autistic children recalled the onset of autism after an MMR vaccination more often than parents of similar children who were diagnosed prior to the media coverage of that controversial and meanwhile retracted study [ 51 ]. A study from 2001 showed better survival for academy award-winning actors, but this was due to immortal time bias that favors the treatment or exposure group [ 52 , 53 ]. A study systematically investigated self-reports about musculoskeletal symptoms and found the presence of information bias. The reason was that participants with little computer-time overestimated, and participants with a lot of computer-time spent underestimated their computer usage [ 54 ].

Information bias can be mitigated by using objective rather than subjective measurements. Standardized operating procedures (SOP) and electronic lab notebooks additionally help to follow well-designed protocols for data collection and handling [ 55 ]. Despite the failure to mitigate bias in studies, complete descriptions of data and methods can at least allow the assessment of risk of bias.

Research execution

Rule 6: avoid questionable research practices.

Questionable research practices (QRPs) can lead to exaggerated findings and false conclusions and thus lead to irreproducible research. Often, QRPs are used with no bad intentions. This becomes evident when methods sections explicitly describe such procedures, for example, to increase the number of samples until statistical significance is reached that supports the hypothesis. Therefore, it is important that researchers know about QRPs in order to recognize and avoid them.

Several questionable QRPs have been named [ 56 , 57 ]. Among them are low statistical power, pseudoreplication, repeated inspection of data, p -hacking [ 58 ], selective reporting, and hypothesizing after the results are known (HARKing).

The first 2 QRPs, low statistical power and pseudoreplication, can be prevented by proper planning and designing of studies, including sample size calculation and appropriate statistical methodology to avoid treating data as independent when in fact they are not. Statistical power is not equal to reproducibility, but statistical power is a precondition of reproducibility as the lack thereof can result in false negative as well as false positive findings (see Rule 3 ).

In fact, a lot of QRP can be avoided with a study protocol and statistical analysis plan. Preregistration, as described in Rule 2, is considered best practice for this purpose. However, many of these issues can additionally be rooted in institutional incentives and rewards. Both funding and promotion are often tied to the quantity rather than the quality of the research output. At universities, still only few or no rewards are given for writing and registering protocols, sharing data, publishing negative findings, and conducting replication studies. Thus, a wider “culture change” is needed.

Rule 7: Be cautious with interpretations of statistical significance

It would help if more researchers were familiar with correct interpretations and possible misinterpretations of statistical tests, p -values, confidence intervals, and statistical power [ 59 , 60 ]. A statistically significant p -value does not necessarily mean that there is a clinically or biologically relevant effect. Specifically, the traditional dichotomization into statistically significant ( p < 0.05) versus statistically nonsignificant ( p ≥ 0.05) results is seldom appropriate, can lead to cherry-picking of results and may eventually corrupt science [ 61 ]. We instead recommend reporting exact p -values and interpreting them in a graded way in terms of the compatibility of the null hypothesis with the data [ 62 , 63 ]. Moreover, a p -value around 0.05 (e.g., 0.047 or 0.055) provides only little information, as is best illustrated by the associated replication power: The probability that a hypothetical replication study of the same design will lead to a statistically significant result is only 50% [ 64 ] and is even lower in the presence of publication bias and regression to the mean (the phenomenon that effect estimates in replication studies are often smaller than the estimates in the original study) [ 65 ]. Claims of novel discoveries should therefore be based on a smaller p -value threshold (e.g., p < 0.005) [ 66 ], but this really depends on the discipline (genome-wide screenings or studies in particle physics often apply much lower thresholds).

Generally, there is often too much emphasis on p -values. A statistical index such as the p -value is just the final product of an analysis, the tip of the iceberg [ 67 ]. Statistical analyses often include many complex stages, from data processing, cleaning, transformation, addressing missing data, modeling, to statistical inference. Errors and pitfalls can creep in at any stage, and even a tiny error can have a big impact on the result [ 68 ]. Also, when many hypothesis tests are conducted (multiple testing), false positive rates may need to be controlled to protect against wrong conclusions, although adjustments for multiple testing are debated [ 69 – 71 ].

Thus, a p -value alone is not a measure of how credible a scientific finding is [ 72 ]. Instead, the quality of the research must be considered, including the study design, the quality of the measurement, and the validity of the assumptions that underlie the data analysis [ 60 , 73 ]. Frameworks exist that help to systematically and transparently assess the certainty in evidence; the most established and widely used one is Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE; www.gradeworkinggroup.org ) [ 74 ].

Training in basic statistics, statistical programming, and reproducible analyses and better involvement of data professionals in academia is necessary. University departments sometimes have statisticians that can support researchers. Importantly, statisticians need to be involved early in the process and on an equal footing and not just at the end of a project to perform the final data analysis.

Rule 8: Make your research open

In reality, science often lacks transparency. Open science makes the process of producing evidence and claims transparent and accessible to others [ 75 ]. Several universities and research funders have already implemented open science roadmaps to advocate free and public science as well as open access to scientific knowledge, with the aim of further developing the credibility of research. Open research allows more eyes to see it and critique it, a principle similar to the “Linus’s law” in software development, which says that if there are enough people to test a software, most bugs will be discovered.

As science often progresses incrementally, writing and sharing a study protocol and making data and methods readily available is crucial to facilitate knowledge building. The Open Science Framework (osf.io) is a free and open-source project management tool that supports researchers throughout the entire project life cycle. OSF enables preregistration of study protocols and sharing of documents, data, analysis code, supplementary materials, and preprints.

To facilitate reproducibility, a research paper can link to data and analysis code deposited on OSF. Computational notebooks are now readily available that unite data processing, data transformations, statistical analyses, figures and tables in a single document (e.g., R Markdown, Jupyter); see also the 10 simple rules for reproducible computational research [ 76 ]. Making both data and code open thus minimizes waste of funding resources and accelerates science.

Open science can also advance researchers’ careers, especially for early-career researchers. The increased visibility, retrievability, and citations of datasets can all help with career building [ 77 ]. Therefore, institutions should provide necessary training, and hiring committees and journals should align their core values with open science, to attract researchers who aim for transparent and credible research [ 78 ].

Research reporting

Rule 9: report all findings.

Publication bias occurs when the outcome of a study influences the decision whether to publish it. Researchers, reviewers, and publishers often find nonsignificant study results not interesting or worth publishing. As a consequence, outcomes and analyses are only selectively reported in the literature [ 79 ], also known as the file drawer effect [ 80 ].

The extent of publication bias in the literature is illustrated by the overwhelming frequency of statistically significant findings [ 81 ]. A study extracted p -values from MEDLINE and PubMed Central and showed that 96% of the records reported at least 1 statistically significant p -value [ 82 ], which seems implausible in the real world. Another study plotted the distribution of more than 1 million z -values from Medline, revealing a huge gap from −2 to 2 [ 83 ]. Positive studies (i.e., statistically significant, perceived as striking or showing a beneficial effect) were 4 times more likely to get published than negative studies [ 84 ].

Often a statistically nonsignificant result is interpreted as a “null” finding. But a nonsignificant finding does not necessarily mean a null effect; absence of evidence is not evidence of absence [ 85 ]. An individual study may be underpowered, resulting in a nonsignificant finding, but the cumulative evidence from multiple studies may indeed provide sufficient evidence in a meta-analysis. Another argument is that a confidence interval that contains the null value often also contains non-null values that may be of high practical importance. Only if all the values inside the interval are deemed unimportant from a practical perspective, then it may be fair to describe a result as a null finding [ 61 ]. We should thus never report “no difference” or “no association” just because a p -value is larger than 0.05 or, equivalently, because a confidence interval includes the “null” [ 61 ].

On the other hand, studies sometimes report statistically nonsignificant results with “spin” to claim that the experimental treatment is beneficial, often by focusing their conclusions on statistically significant differences on secondary outcomes despite a statistically nonsignificant difference for the primary outcome [ 86 , 87 ].

Findings that are not being published have a tremendous impact on the research ecosystem, distorting our knowledge of the scientific landscape by perpetuating misconceptions, and jeopardizing judgment of researchers and the public trust in science. In clinical research, publication bias can mislead care decisions and harm patients, for example, when treatments appear useful despite only minimal or even absent benefits reported in studies that were not published and thus are unknown to physicians [ 88 ]. Moreover, publication bias also directly affects the formulation and proliferation of scientific theories, which are taught to students and early-career researchers, thereby perpetuating biased research from the core. It has been shown in modeling studies that unless a sufficient proportion of negative studies are published, a false claim can become an accepted fact [ 89 ] and the false positive rates influence trustworthiness in a given field [ 90 ].

In sum, negative findings are undervalued. They need to be more consistently reported at the study level or be systematically investigated at the systematic review level. Researchers have their share of responsibilities, but there is clearly a lack of incentives from promotion and tenure committees, journals, and funders.

Rule 10: Follow reporting guidelines

Study reports need to faithfully describe the aim of the study and what was done, including potential deviations from the original protocol, as well as what was found. Yet, there is ample evidence of discrepancies between protocols and research reports, and of insufficient quality of reporting [ 79 , 91 – 95 ]. Reporting deficiencies threaten our ability to clearly communicate findings, replicate studies, make informed decisions, and build on existing evidence, wasting time and resources invested in the research [ 96 ].

Reporting guidelines aim to provide the minimum information needed on key design features and analysis decisions, ensuring that findings can be adequately used and studies replicated. In 2008, the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of Health Research (EQUATOR) network was initiated to provide reporting guidelines for a variety of study designs along with guidelines for education and training on how to enhance quality and transparency of health research. Currently, there are 468 reporting guidelines listed in the network; see the most prominent guidelines in Table 2 . Furthermore, following the ICMJE recommendations, medical journals are increasingly endorsing reporting guidelines [ 97 ], in some cases making it mandatory to submit the appropriate reporting checklist along with the manuscript.

The EQUATOR Network is a library with more than 400 reporting guidelines in health research ( www.equator-network.org ).

The use of reporting guidelines and journal endorsement has led to a positive impact on the quality and transparency of research reporting, but improvement is still needed to maximize the value of research [ 98 , 99 ].

Conclusions

Originally, this paper targeted early-career researchers; however, throughout the development of the rules, it became clear that the present recommendations can serve all researchers irrespective of their seniority. We focused on practical guidelines for planning, conducting, and reporting of research. Others have aligned GRP with similar topics [ 100 , 101 ]. Even though we provide 10 simple rules, the word “simple” should not be taken lightly. Putting the rules into practice usually requires effort and time, especially at the beginning of a research project. However, time can also be redeemed, for example, when certain choices can be justified to reviewers by providing a study protocol or when data can be quickly reanalyzed by using computational notebooks and dynamic reports.

Researchers have field-specific research skills, but sometimes are not aware of best practices in other fields that can be useful. Universities should offer cross-disciplinary GRP courses across faculties to train the next generation of scientists. Such courses are an important building block to improve the reproducibility of science.

Acknowledgments

This article was written along the Good Research Practice (GRP) courses at the University of Zurich provided by the Center of Reproducible Science ( www.crs.uzh.ch ). All materials from the course are available at https://osf.io/t9rqm/ . We appreciated the discussion, development, and refinement of this article within the working group “training” of the SwissRN ( www.swissrn.org ). We are grateful to Philip Bourne for a lot of valuable comments on the earlier versions of the manuscript.

Funding Statement

S.S. received funding from SfwF (Stiftung für wissenschaftliche Forschung an der Universität Zürich; grant no. STWF-19-007). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

How to Write a Research Paper Introduction (with Examples)

The research paper introduction section, along with the Title and Abstract, can be considered the face of any research paper. The following article is intended to guide you in organizing and writing the research paper introduction for a quality academic article or dissertation.

The research paper introduction aims to present the topic to the reader. A study will only be accepted for publishing if you can ascertain that the available literature cannot answer your research question. So it is important to ensure that you have read important studies on that particular topic, especially those within the last five to ten years, and that they are properly referenced in this section. 1 What should be included in the research paper introduction is decided by what you want to tell readers about the reason behind the research and how you plan to fill the knowledge gap. The best research paper introduction provides a systemic review of existing work and demonstrates additional work that needs to be done. It needs to be brief, captivating, and well-referenced; a well-drafted research paper introduction will help the researcher win half the battle.

The introduction for a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your research topic
• Capture reader interest
• Summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Define your specific research problem and problem statement
• Highlight the novelty and contributions of the study
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The research paper introduction can vary in size and structure depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or is a review paper. Some research paper introduction examples are only half a page while others are a few pages long. In many cases, the introduction will be shorter than all of the other sections of your paper; its length depends on the size of your paper as a whole.

• Break through writer’s block. Write your research paper introduction with Paperpal Copilot

Table of Contents

What is the introduction for a research paper, why is the introduction important in a research paper, craft a compelling introduction section with paperpal. try now, 1. introduce the research topic:, 2. determine a research niche:, 3. place your research within the research niche:, craft accurate research paper introductions with paperpal. start writing now, frequently asked questions on research paper introduction, key points to remember.

The introduction in a research paper is placed at the beginning to guide the reader from a broad subject area to the specific topic that your research addresses. They present the following information to the reader

• Scope: The topic covered in the research paper
• Context: Background of your topic
• Importance: Why your research matters in that particular area of research and the industry problem that can be targeted

The research paper introduction conveys a lot of information and can be considered an essential roadmap for the rest of your paper. A good introduction for a research paper is important for the following reasons:

• It stimulates your reader’s interest: A good introduction section can make your readers want to read your paper by capturing their interest. It informs the reader what they are going to learn and helps determine if the topic is of interest to them.
• It helps the reader understand the research background: Without a clear introduction, your readers may feel confused and even struggle when reading your paper. A good research paper introduction will prepare them for the in-depth research to come. It provides you the opportunity to engage with the readers and demonstrate your knowledge and authority on the specific topic.
• It explains why your research paper is worth reading: Your introduction can convey a lot of information to your readers. It introduces the topic, why the topic is important, and how you plan to proceed with your research.
• It helps guide the reader through the rest of the paper: The research paper introduction gives the reader a sense of the nature of the information that will support your arguments and the general organization of the paragraphs that will follow. It offers an overview of what to expect when reading the main body of your paper.

What are the parts of introduction in the research?

A good research paper introduction section should comprise three main elements: 2

• What is known: This sets the stage for your research. It informs the readers of what is known on the subject.
• What is lacking: This is aimed at justifying the reason for carrying out your research. This could involve investigating a new concept or method or building upon previous research.
• What you aim to do: This part briefly states the objectives of your research and its major contributions. Your detailed hypothesis will also form a part of this section.

How to write a research paper introduction?

The first step in writing the research paper introduction is to inform the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening statement. The second step involves establishing the kinds of research that have been done and ending with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to address. Finally, the research paper introduction clarifies how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses. If your research involved testing hypotheses, these should be stated along with your research question. The hypothesis should be presented in the past tense since it will have been tested by the time you are writing the research paper introduction.

The following key points, with examples, can guide you when writing the research paper introduction section:

• Highlight the importance of the research field or topic
• Describe the background of the topic
• Present an overview of current research on the topic

Example: The inclusion of experiential and competency-based learning has benefitted electronics engineering education. Industry partnerships provide an excellent alternative for students wanting to engage in solving real-world challenges. Industry-academia participation has grown in recent years due to the need for skilled engineers with practical training and specialized expertise. However, from the educational perspective, many activities are needed to incorporate sustainable development goals into the university curricula and consolidate learning innovation in universities.

• Reveal a gap in existing research or oppose an existing assumption
• Formulate the research question

Example: There have been plausible efforts to integrate educational activities in higher education electronics engineering programs. However, very few studies have considered using educational research methods for performance evaluation of competency-based higher engineering education, with a focus on technical and or transversal skills. To remedy the current need for evaluating competencies in STEM fields and providing sustainable development goals in engineering education, in this study, a comparison was drawn between study groups without and with industry partners.

• State the purpose of your study
• Highlight the key characteristics of your study
• Describe important results
• Highlight the novelty of the study.
• Offer a brief overview of the structure of the paper.

Example: The study evaluates the main competency needed in the applied electronics course, which is a fundamental core subject for many electronics engineering undergraduate programs. We compared two groups, without and with an industrial partner, that offered real-world projects to solve during the semester. This comparison can help determine significant differences in both groups in terms of developing subject competency and achieving sustainable development goals.

Write a Research Paper Introduction in Minutes with Paperpal

Paperpal Copilot is a generative AI-powered academic writing assistant. It’s trained on millions of published scholarly articles and over 20 years of STM experience. Paperpal Copilot helps authors write better and faster with:

• Real-time writing suggestions
• In-depth checks for language and grammar correction
• Paraphrasing to add variety, ensure academic tone, and trim text to meet journal limits

With Paperpal Copilot, create a research paper introduction effortlessly. In this step-by-step guide, we’ll walk you through how Paperpal transforms your initial ideas into a polished and publication-ready introduction.

How to use Paperpal to write the Introduction section

Step 1: Sign up on Paperpal and click on the Copilot feature, under this choose Outlines > Research Article > Introduction

Step 2: Add your unstructured notes or initial draft, whether in English or another language, to Paperpal, which is to be used as the base for your content.

Step 3: Fill in the specifics, such as your field of study, brief description or details you want to include, which will help the AI generate the outline for your Introduction.

Step 4: Use this outline and sentence suggestions to develop your content, adding citations where needed and modifying it to align with your specific research focus.

Step 5: Turn to Paperpal’s granular language checks to refine your content, tailor it to reflect your personal writing style, and ensure it effectively conveys your message.

You can use the same process to develop each section of your article, and finally your research paper in half the time and without any of the stress.

The purpose of the research paper introduction is to introduce the reader to the problem definition, justify the need for the study, and describe the main theme of the study. The aim is to gain the reader’s attention by providing them with necessary background information and establishing the main purpose and direction of the research.

The length of the research paper introduction can vary across journals and disciplines. While there are no strict word limits for writing the research paper introduction, an ideal length would be one page, with a maximum of 400 words over 1-4 paragraphs. Generally, it is one of the shorter sections of the paper as the reader is assumed to have at least a reasonable knowledge about the topic. 2 For example, for a study evaluating the role of building design in ensuring fire safety, there is no need to discuss definitions and nature of fire in the introduction; you could start by commenting upon the existing practices for fire safety and how your study will add to the existing knowledge and practice.

When deciding what to include in the research paper introduction, the rest of the paper should also be considered. The aim is to introduce the reader smoothly to the topic and facilitate an easy read without much dependency on external sources. 3 Below is a list of elements you can include to prepare a research paper introduction outline and follow it when you are writing the research paper introduction. Topic introduction: This can include key definitions and a brief history of the topic. Research context and background: Offer the readers some general information and then narrow it down to specific aspects. Details of the research you conducted: A brief literature review can be included to support your arguments or line of thought. Rationale for the study: This establishes the relevance of your study and establishes its importance. Importance of your research: The main contributions are highlighted to help establish the novelty of your study Research hypothesis: Introduce your research question and propose an expected outcome. Organization of the paper: Include a short paragraph of 3-4 sentences that highlights your plan for the entire paper

Cite only works that are most relevant to your topic; as a general rule, you can include one to three. Note that readers want to see evidence of original thinking. So it is better to avoid using too many references as it does not leave much room for your personal standpoint to shine through. Citations in your research paper introduction support the key points, and the number of citations depend on the subject matter and the point discussed. If the research paper introduction is too long or overflowing with citations, it is better to cite a few review articles rather than the individual articles summarized in the review. A good point to remember when citing research papers in the introduction section is to include at least one-third of the references in the introduction.

The literature review plays a significant role in the research paper introduction section. A good literature review accomplishes the following: Introduces the topic – Establishes the study’s significance – Provides an overview of the relevant literature – Provides context for the study using literature – Identifies knowledge gaps However, remember to avoid making the following mistakes when writing a research paper introduction: Do not use studies from the literature review to aggressively support your research Avoid direct quoting Do not allow literature review to be the focus of this section. Instead, the literature review should only aid in setting a foundation for the manuscript.

Remember the following key points for writing a good research paper introduction: 4

• Avoid stuffing too much general information: Avoid including what an average reader would know and include only that information related to the problem being addressed in the research paper introduction. For example, when describing a comparative study of non-traditional methods for mechanical design optimization, information related to the traditional methods and differences between traditional and non-traditional methods would not be relevant. In this case, the introduction for the research paper should begin with the state-of-the-art non-traditional methods and methods to evaluate the efficiency of newly developed algorithms.
• Avoid packing too many references: Cite only the required works in your research paper introduction. The other works can be included in the discussion section to strengthen your findings.
• Avoid extensive criticism of previous studies: Avoid being overly critical of earlier studies while setting the rationale for your study. A better place for this would be the Discussion section, where you can highlight the advantages of your method.
• Avoid describing conclusions of the study: When writing a research paper introduction remember not to include the findings of your study. The aim is to let the readers know what question is being answered. The actual answer should only be given in the Results and Discussion section.

To summarize, the research paper introduction section should be brief yet informative. It should convince the reader the need to conduct the study and motivate him to read further. If you’re feeling stuck or unsure, choose trusted AI academic writing assistants like Paperpal to effortlessly craft your research paper introduction and other sections of your research article.

1. Jawaid, S. A., & Jawaid, M. (2019). How to write introduction and discussion. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 13(Suppl 1), S18.

2. Dewan, P., & Gupta, P. (2016). Writing the title, abstract and introduction: Looks matter!. Indian pediatrics, 53, 235-241.

3. Cetin, S., & Hackam, D. J. (2005). An approach to the writing of a scientific Manuscript1. Journal of Surgical Research, 128(2), 165-167.

4. Bavdekar, S. B. (2015). Writing introduction: Laying the foundations of a research paper. Journal of the Association of Physicians of India, 63(7), 44-6.

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• Scientific Writing Style Guides Explained
• 5 Reasons for Rejection After Peer Review
• Ethical Research Practices For Research with Human Subjects
• 8 Most Effective Ways to Increase Motivation for Thesis Writing 

Practice vs. Practise: Learn the Difference

Academic paraphrasing: why paperpal’s rewrite should be your first choice , you may also like, mla works cited page: format, template & examples, how to write a high-quality conference paper, academic editing: how to self-edit academic text with..., measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence, phd qualifying exam: tips for success , ai in education: it’s time to change the..., is it ethical to use ai-generated abstracts without..., what are journal guidelines on using generative ai..., quillbot review: features, pricing, and free alternatives, what is an academic paper types and elements .

Enter your search term

*Limited to most recent 250 articles Use advanced search to set an earlier date range

Sponsored by   

Saving articles

Articles can be saved for quick future reference. This is a subscriber benefit. If you are already a subscriber, please log in to save this article. If you are not a subscriber, click on the View Subscription Options button to subscribe.

Article Saved

Contact us at [email protected]

Forgot Password

Please enter the email address that you used to subscribe on Engineering News. Your password will be sent to this address.

Content Restricted

This content is only available to subscribers

REAL ECONOMY NEWS

sponsored by  

• LATEST NEWS
• LOADSHEDDING
• MULTIMEDIA LATEST VIDEOS REAL ECONOMY REPORTS SECOND TAKE AUDIO ARTICLES CREAMER MEDIA ON SAFM WEBINARS YOUTUBE
• SECTORS AGRICULTURE AUTOMOTIVE CHEMICALS CONSTRUCTION DEFENCE & AEROSPACE ECONOMY ELECTRICITY ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL MANUFACTURING METALS MINING RENEWABLE ENERGY SERVICES TECHNOLOGY & COMMUNICATIONS TRADE TRANSPORT & LOGISTICS WATER
• SPONSORED POSTS
• ANNOUNCEMENTS
• BUSINESS THOUGHT LEADERSHIP
• MINING WEEKLY
• SHOWROOM PLUS
• PRODUCT PORTAL
• MADE IN SOUTH AFRICA
• PRESS OFFICE
• WEBINAR RECORDINGS
• COMPANY PROFILES
• VIRTUAL SHOWROOMS
• CREAMER MEDIA
• BACK COPIES
• BUSINESS LEADER
• SUPPLEMENTS
• FEATURES LIBRARY
• RESEARCH REPORTS
• PROJECT BROWSER

Article Enquiry

Research project launched into telemedicine and HIV/Aids management in South Africa

Email This Article

separate emails by commas, maximum limit of 4 addresses

A pharmacist dispensing HIV/Aids medication

Photo by Reuters

As a magazine-and-online subscriber to Creamer Media's Engineering News & Mining Weekly , you are entitled to one free research report of your choice . You would have received a promotional code at the time of your subscription. Have this code ready and click here . At the time of check-out, please enter your promotional code to download your free report. Email [email protected] if you have forgotten your promotional code. If you have previously accessed your free report, you can purchase additional Research Reports by clicking on the “Buy Report” button on this page. The most cost-effective way to access all our Research Reports is by subscribing to Creamer Media's Research Channel Africa - you can upgrade your subscription now at this link .

The most cost-effective way to access all our Research Reports is by subscribing to Creamer Media's Research Channel Africa - you can upgrade your subscription now at this link . For a full list of Research Channel Africa benefits, click here

If you are not a subscriber, you can either buy the individual research report by clicking on the ‘Buy Report’ button, or you can subscribe and, not only gain access to your one free report, but also enjoy all other subscriber benefits , including 1) an electronic archive of back issues of the weekly news magazine; 2) access to an industrial and mining projects browser; 3) access to a database of published articles; and 4) the ability to save articles for future reference. At the time of your subscription, Creamer Media’s subscriptions department will be in contact with you to ensure that you receive a copy of your preferred Research Report. The most cost-effective way to access all our Research Reports is by subscribing to Creamer Media's Research Channel Africa - you can upgrade your subscription now at this link .

If you are a Creamer Media subscriber, click here to log in.

30th May 2024

By: Rebecca Campbell

Creamer Media Senior Deputy Editor

Font size: - +

How effective is telemedicine as a differentiated service delivery model for the prevention of HIV/Aids in South Africa? This is the question to be addressed by a PhD researcher at Stellenbosch University’s Africa Centre for HIV/Aids Management, Rudi de Koker .

“Globally, there is a goal of ‘ending’ HIV/Aids by 2030,” he points out to Engineering News . “This will need the use of different service delivery models. One of these could be telemedicine. Frankly, our expectation is that telemedicine will indeed be valuable, but could it do more? How big a role could it, should it, play?”

Telemedicine – virtual consultations – has only been formalised in South Africa in recent years, having only been authorised by the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) as an extraordinary measure required to address the Covid-19 pandemic. Officially, in South Africa, telemedicine is still only a temporary emergency measure.

Even under the impact of Covid, the HPCSA only authorised telemedicine for use in situations in which there was already an existing relationship between the patient and the healthcare provider. “Other than this, no single framework exists for the use of telemedicine in South Africa,” he notes. “If this research shows telemedicine is effective in this country, then we have the basis to justify the development of a national telemedicine framework, including a White Paper.”

Given that he is also project manager at Digital Health Cape Town (DHCT), De Koker’s interest in the topic is unsurprising. DHCT has developed and manages the HIV Clinicians Expert Telemedicine Platform, which is the largest HIV telemedicine platform in South Africa, covering the entire country (and not just Cape Town). Currently, the platform embraces 397 active trained pharmacists and 88 active trained nurses.

“The key research point, with regard to South Africa, is the use of telemedicine for virtual consultations to create access to treatment,” he stresses. “Also, because of the disparity between urban and rural areas in South Africa, I’d like to see how telemedicine can be utilised to link health seekers in rural areas closer to healthcare services. That’s my personal ambition.”

The research project should be completed by the end of 2026.     

Edited by Creamer Media Reporter

Research Reports

Latest Multimedia

Booyco Electronics, South African pioneer of Proximity Detection Systems, offers safety solutions for underground and surface mining, quarrying,...

Our Easy Access Chute concept was developed to reduce the risks related to liner maintenance. Currently, replacing wear liners require that...

sponsored by

Press Office

Announcements

Subscribe to improve your user experience...

Option 1 (equivalent of R125 a month):

Receive a weekly copy of Creamer Media's Engineering News & Mining Weekly magazine (print copy for those in South Africa and e-magazine for those outside of South Africa) Receive daily email newsletters Access to full search results Access archive of magazine back copies Access to Projects in Progress Access to ONE Research Report of your choice in PDF format

Option 2 (equivalent of R375 a month):

All benefits from Option 1 PLUS Access to Creamer Media's Research Channel Africa for ALL Research Reports, in PDF format, on various industrial and mining sectors including Electricity; Water; Energy Transition; Hydrogen; Roads, Rail and Ports; Coal; Gold; Platinum; Battery Metals; etc.

Already a subscriber?

Forgotten your password?

MAGAZINE & ONLINE

R1500 (equivalent of R125 a month)

Receive weekly copy of Creamer Media's Engineering News & Mining Weekly magazine (print copy for those in South Africa and e-magazine for those outside of South Africa)

Access to full search results

Access archive of magazine back copies

Access to Projects in Progress

Access to ONE Research Report of your choice in PDF format

RESEARCH CHANNEL AFRICA

R4500 (equivalent of R375 a month)

All benefits from Option 1

Electricity

Energy Transition

Roads, Rail and Ports

Battery Metals

CORPORATE PACKAGES

Discounted prices based on volume

Receive all benefits from Option 1 or Option 2 delivered to numerous people at your company

Intranet integration access to all in your organisation

The SOLSTICE program aims to develop novel solar-powered and hybrid solar-powered systems with significantly higher power density than existing technologies. These systems will be capable of maintaining performance over their mission lifetime in challenging remote applications, including in an earth-orbital environment (Track 1) and on the earth surface (Track 2). Novel component technologies and systems-level approaches will be leveraged to both maximize power output over a large range of operational conditions and mitigate anticipated failure modes. This will lead to a significant increase in the total energy yield of a power system over its intended lifetime and greater resilience against ever-present risks. IARPA seeks technical approaches that improve and look beyond individual component performance to consider the systems-level challenges and opportunities to enhance useable energy and minimize loss. Careful consideration of the intersection of novel and established component technologies, including photovoltaics, optics, thermal management/conversion, power electronics, energy storage, and other technical areas will be needed. The program will initially focus on component technology development as part of a system concept design, followed by system prototype development, testing, and refinement for target environments.  

PROPOSERS' DAY INFORMATION

SOLSTICE Proposers' Day Registration Site

SAM.gov reference

SOLSTICE Teaming Form

Draft BAA Technical Section

Proposers' Day Briefings

SOLSTICE Proposers' Day Briefing

Apogee Semiconductor Lightning Talk

Arizona State University Lightning Talk

Ascent Systems Technologies Lightning Talk

Berkeley Power and Energy Center Lightning Talk 

Boise State University Lightning Talk 

Colorado School of Mines Lightning Talk

General Electric Vernova Lightning Talk

MicroLink Devices, Inc. Lightning Talk

Northwestern University Lightning Talk

Pennsylvania State University Lightning Talk

RMIT University Lightning Talk

Rochester Institute of Technology, University of Michigan, and HNU Systems Lightning Talk 

Solestial Lightning Talk

Southwest Research Institute Lightning Talk

SRI International Lightning Talk 

Tandem PV Lightning Talk

University at Buffalo Lightning Talk

University of California, Los Angeles Lightning Talk

University of Maryland, College Park and Oklahoma State University Lightning Talk

Vicor Lightning Talk

Contact Information

Program manager.

Dr. Brian Borak

[email protected]

301-243-2030

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA)

Solicitation status.

PRE-SOLICITATION

Proposers' Day Date

May 7, 2024

Program Summary

Phone Numbers

Routine and emergency care.

Companion Animal Hospital in Ithaca, NY for cats, dogs, exotics, and wildlife

Equine and Nemo Farm Animal Hospitals in Ithaca, NY for horses and farm animals

Cornell Ruffian Equine Specialists, on Long Island for every horse

Ambulatory and Production Medicine for service on farms within 30 miles of Ithaca, NY

Animal Health Diagnostic Center New York State Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory

General Information

Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine Ithaca, New York 14853-6401

Longitudinal non-invasive measurements of blood pressure, autonomic function and baroreflex in mice using radiotelemetry

• Recognizing the critical need to perform non-invasive, long-term measurements of blood pressure in the mouse, Dr. Davisson pioneered the use of telemetry in this species nearly a decade ago.
• Compared to other methods of measuring blood pressure (e.g., tail cuff, exteriorized catheter), data acquired with telemetry are free from physiological and psychological stress- and anesthesia-induced artifact. Moreover, telemeters make use of a novel catheter design that features a gel-filled tip that does not require flushing, thereby increasing patency and extending the period of time during which blood pressure can be recorded. There is also the increased chance of capturing occasional and transient events over a long period as well as a reduction in the number of animals required due to more and better quality data.
• Continuous recordings using telemetry also facilitate the assessment of a number of other cardiovascular parameters such as autonomic function, spontaneous baroreflex sensitivity, circadian variations or the blood pressure response to treatments (e.g., changes in ambient temperature, drug administration, dietary salt, caloric restriction, exercise, stress, pregnancy, etc.).

• Share full article

Should You Delay Your Morning Caffeine?

Some influencers say that doing so can offer benefits. We looked at the evidence.

Credit... Joyce Lee for The New York Times

Supported by

By Alice Callahan

• May 29, 2024

Q: I’ve heard that drinking coffee first thing in the morning can interfere with my ability to feel awake and can lead to an afternoon energy crash. Is that true?

It’s an idea that has been popularized by online influencers : Avoid consuming caffeine for 90 to 120 minutes after waking up, they say, and you will perk up more naturally, thwart the dreaded afternoon slump and have better sleep.

Proponents explain the idea as if it’s supported by good evidence, with some people who have tried the method saying it has “ been a game changer ” for their energy levels.

But scientists who study the relationship between caffeine and sleep say that while there may be some benefits to putting off your morning coffee, there’s not much research to back them up.

In some cases, experts warn, the risks of delaying your morning caffeine could outweigh the purported benefits — or even be dangerous.

How Caffeine Works, and How Long It Lasts

Throughout the day, your body produces a chemical called adenosine, which binds to receptors in your brain and makes you feel drowsy. Caffeine perks you up by blocking those receptors, said Marilyn Cornelis, a caffeine researcher at the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.

But you don’t feel the stimulating effects of caffeine immediately after your first sip of coffee, said Michael Grandner, the director of the sleep and health research program at the University of Arizona. It takes about 20 to 30 minutes for caffeine to be absorbed into your bloodstream, reach your brain and make you feel more alert, he said.

How long caffeine keeps you sharp “varies considerably,” based in part on your genetics, Dr. Cornelis said.

Some people may have one morning brew and “ride that for much of the day,” she said. Others clear caffeine from their bodies more quickly and might want another cup within a few hours, she added.

“ Everyone responds to caffeine differently ,” Dr. Cornelis said, so there’s not a one-size-fits-all solution for timing your caffeine.

The Evidence For — and Against — Caffeine Delay

Because adenosine levels in your brain decrease while you sleep, they’re at their lowest immediately after you wake up, Dr. Grandner said. So with little adenosine present for caffeine to block, a cup of coffee first thing will give you less of a boost — or “less bang for your buck,” as Dr. Grandner said — than when adenosine levels are high.

This may be one rationale for delaying your caffeine in the morning, Dr. Grandner said. He often waits for 30 to 60 minutes after waking to have his first cup of coffee, but there are no studies on what the optimal timing should be; it’s more about personal preference, he said.

Another potential reason to delay your morning caffeine is if you want to have caffeine only once per day, Dr. Cornelis said. Timing it for later in the morning could help extend its effects into the early afternoon, potentially countering any drop in alertness at that time.

That said, there’s no harm in having caffeine first thing, Dr. Grandner said.

Although some online proponents suggest that doing so will disrupt your body’s normal waking process by interfering with the natural rise of cortisol, there is little evidence for this. The few small studies that have examined caffeine’s influence on cortisol have found that in those who consume caffeine regularly, it has little effect on morning cortisol levels, said Allison Brager, a neurobiologist for the U.S. Army.

The reality is that many people don’t get enough sleep , so if you need to be alert first thing in the morning, caffeine can be a lifesaver, Dr. Brager said. Research has shown that caffeine can enhance mental sharpness and physical performance . For soldiers driving heavy trucks, firefighters working overnight shifts or surgeons scrubbing in for early morning procedures, delaying caffeine “can be a recipe for disaster,” Dr. Brager said.

If you’re an early morning exerciser, she added, it makes sense to have caffeine as soon as possible because it may improve your workout .

It’s also fine to have another cup of coffee (or other source of caffeine) if and when your energy levels wane around midday, Dr. Grandner said. Just avoid having it within six hours — or eight to 12 hours, if you have trouble falling asleep — before bedtime, he added.

If you feel like you need caffeine throughout the day just to function, consider seeing a sleep specialist, Dr. Grandner said; you may have a treatable disorder like insomnia or sleep apnea .

And keep in mind, Dr. Grandner added, that coffee and tea provide more than just caffeine: The drinks are also great sources of antioxidants and beneficial plant-based compounds, which may explain some of their health advantages .

Coffee also helps many people have regular bowel movements . And for most of us, a morning coffee ritual offers a simple source of pleasure. What could be more optimal than that?

Alice Callahan is a Times reporter covering nutrition and health. She has a Ph.D. in nutrition from the University of California, Davis. More about Alice Callahan

A Guide to Coffee

From machine-brewed pods to small-batch pour-overs, coffee is steeped into our culture. here’s a closer look at this popular beverage..

After a few cups, you may have found yourself asking: Is coffee good for me? The answer is yes, but it depends on a few factors .

There are proven health benefits. Drinking coffee has been linked to a lower risk of dying  and a reduced risk of all kinds of ailments . But is it possible to have too much ?

As global warming threatens the two main varieties of coffee, growers in Uganda are betting on a type that can stand up to heat, drought and pests .

When used correctly, a cup of coffee before exercising can improve your performance. Here is what to know .

For many people, coffee quickly and reliably jump-starts gut activity and an urgent need to poop — but it’s not clear why .

The collective obsession with iced coffee is still growing , even in the dead of winter. Is the hot cup of joe on its way out?

Whether you’re a cold-brew connoisseur or you just want a basic cup o’ joe, Wirecutter has the best coffee makers , as well as tips on how to clean your burr coffee grinder .

Advertisement

Trump is trending on Chinese social media, and many are rejoicing

E ditor’s Note: Sign up for  CNN’s Meanwhile in China newsletter  which explores what you need to know about the country’s rise and how it impacts the world.

As Donald Trump became the first former US president to be convicted of a felony on Thursday, the historic verdict sparked huge interest – and a fair amount of schadenfreude – in China.

As a rising authoritarian superpower, China has long sought to project its political system as superior to American democracy.

But while Trump’s trial has been a boon for that narrative, it’s also offered a potential window into something unimaginable and dangerous to the ruling Chinese Communist Party — an elected leader held accountable by independent courts and prosecutors, convicted by a jury of his peers .

For months, Chinese propagandists have attempted to use Trump’s indictments to strengthen Beijing’s narrative of a United States in decline, citing the months-long legal battle as a prime example of the polarization and dysfunction of American politics.

And as China woke up Friday to the news of Trump’s conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, the country’s heavily censored social media lit up.

On Weibo, China’s X-like platform, the verdict became the top trending topic, racking up more than 120 million views by the afternoon.

“Trump’s supporters, hurry up and mobilize, storm the Capitol,” said a top comment under a news brief by state news agency Xinhua.

Another said: “Comrade Nation Builder Trump should not be fighting alone.”

On the Chinese internet, the former US president earned the nickname of Chuan Jianguo , or “Trump, the (Chinese) nation builder” during his time in office – a quip to suggest his isolationist foreign policy and divisive domestic agenda were actually helping Beijing to overtake Washington on the global stage.

Some nationalist influencers gleefully mocked the verdict. “It seems that in 2024, a civil war in America is not just a dream!”  said  one such blogger with 4 million followers.

Under leader Xi Jinping, China’s most assertive leader in decades, the country’s social media platforms have become increasingly dominated by anti-American, nationalistic voices.

“Although he is guilty, he can still run for president. A ‘criminal’ can become president – this is the ridiculous aspect of Western-style democracy,” said another.

Hu Xijin, former editor-in-chief of state-run nationalist tabloid Global Times, also weighed in.

“Naturally, Chinese people are watching the spectacle with amusement,” he said on Weibo. “Here’s what everyone is most concerned about: First, will Trump actually go to jail? Second, can he still run for president?”

But analysts say Trump’s conviction could be a tricky topic for Chinese state propagandists to navigate.

“On the one hand, it highlights a rotting and fracturing American democracy. On the other hand, it highlights that a former top leader can be arrested, put on trial, judged by jury of peers and convicted, for relatively small acts of corruption,” wrote Bill Bishop, a China watcher and author of the Sinocism newsletter.

China’s judicial system remains tightly beholden to the ruling Communist Party, according to legal observers, and has a conviction rate of  around 99%.

The timing of the conviction also added to the sensitivity, coming just days before the 35th anniversary of Beijing’s bloody crackdown of the pro-democracy Tiananmen movement in 1989, according to Bishop.

So far, Chinese state media outlets have yet to publish the kind of blistering commentaries that previously appeared alongside news coverage of Trump’s legal entanglements.

Alfred Wu, an associate professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore, said China’s state media is unlikely to play up the coverage in the days ahead.

“They don’t want to attack Donald Trump because if he becomes the president, they know the consequences. Instead, they’re likely to use it to showcase the problems of the US system,” said Wu, a former reporter in China.

“They need to be really careful about that.”

For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com

• My View My View
• Following Following
• Saved Saved

How Donald Trump got convicted at his hush money trial

• Medium Text
• Company Trump Organization Inc Follow

'OUT OF CHARACTER’

Sign up here.

Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York; Editing by Howard Goller

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

Thomson Reuters

Reports on the New York federal courts. Previously worked as a correspondent in Venezuela and Argentina.

Read Next / Editor's Picks

Industry Insight Chevron

David Thomas

Mike Scarcella, David Thomas

Karen Sloan

Henry Engler