IMRaD

Style: Times Roman

Font Size: 12
Spacing: 1.5 Justify
Bond Paper: A4

What is IMRAD ?
 Most prominent norm for a qualitative and quantitative study.
 Facilitates literature review, allowing readers to navigate articles more quickly to locate
material relevant to their purpose
 It is a structure, not a format/style (APA 6th Ed)

 IMRaD is an acronym, which stands for Introduction, Method, Results, and

Discussion. It is an increasingly popular organizational structure used in several scientific
journals, and social sciences studies. Using the IMRaD are usually short and concise. The
language will be as plain and as clear as possible. There is no place in this type of writing
for personal views and purple pros. It allows readers to navigate through content with
ease. It calls for precise writing – no flowery language. The IMRaD further facilitates
literature reviews.

IMRAD Outline

WHAT GOES INTO EACH SECTION

Introduction
Why did you start? - What’s the background of the study
What is the problem
provide research question
explain the significance
review of background or known information on your topic
Methods
What did you do? - What’s the design of the study
describe your methods for gathering information
explain your sources of information, both primary and secondary
Results

1
l.lozares
 What did you find? - What are the findings of the study
describe what you found out from your research.
develop each point thoroughly, as this is the main section of your research
paper
Discussion
What does it all mean? How do you relate your study to other studies based on
the findings?
explain the significance of your findings
describe how they support your thesis
discuss limitations of your research

CONCLUSIONS: A conclusion is an important part of the paper; it provides closure for the
reader while reminding the reader of the contents and importance of the paper. It accomplishes
this by stepping back from the specifics in order to view the bigger picture of the document. In
other words, it is reminding the reader of the main argument. For most course papers, it is
usually one paragraph that simply and succinctly restates the main ideas and arguments, pulling
everything together to help clarify the study of the paper. A conclusion does not introduce new
ideas; instead, it should clarify the intent and importance of the paper. It can also suggest
possible future research on the topic.

RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations should be one-sentence, succinct, and start with an

action verb (create, establish, fund, facilitate, coordinate, etc.). They should use a “SMART”
format (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Timely). Each recommendation should be
followed by a few sentences of explanatory text.

APPENDICES: Consist of figures, tables, maps, photographs, raw data, computer programs,
musical examples, interview questions, sample questionnaires, etc.

REFERRENCES: References provide the information necessary for readers to identify and
retrieve each work cited in the text.

Check each reference carefully against the original publication to ensure information is accurate
and complete. Accurately prepared references help establish your credibility as a careful
researcher and writer.

2
l.lozares
Consistency in reference formatting allows readers to focus on the content of your reference list,
discerning both the types of works you consulted and the important reference elements (who,
when, what, and where) with ease. When you present each reference in a consistent fashion,
readers do not need to spend time determining how you organized the information. And when
searching the literature, yourself, you also save time and effort when reading reference lists in
the works of others that are written in APA Style.

ABSTRACT: An abstract is a short summary of your completed research. It is intended to

describe your work without going into great detail. Abstracts should be self-contained and
concise, explaining your work as briefly and clearly as possible.

SAMPLE ABSTRACT

History / Social Science

"Their War": The Perspective of the South Vietnamese Military in Their Own Words

Author: Julie Pham

Despite the vast research by Americans on the Vietnam War, little is known about the
perspective of South Vietnamese military, officially called the Republic of Vietnam Armed
Forces (RVNAF). The overall image that emerges from the literature is negative: lazy, corrupt,
unpatriotic, apathetic soldiers with poor fighting spirits. This study recovers some of the South
Vietnamese military perspective for an American audience through qualitative interviews with
40 RVNAF veterans now living in San José, Sacramento, and Seattle, home to three of the top
five largest Vietnamese American communities in the nation. An analysis of these interviews
yields the veterans' own explanations that complicate and sometimes even challenge three widely
held assumptions about the South Vietnamese military: 1) the RVNAF was rife with corruption
at the top ranks, hurting the morale of the lower ranks; 2) racial relations between the South
Vietnamese military and the Americans were tense and hostile; and 3) the RVNAF was apathetic
in defending South Vietnam from communism. The stories add nuance to our understanding of
who the South Vietnamese were in the Vietnam War. This study is part of a growing body of
research on non-American perspectives of the war. In using a largely untapped source of
Vietnamese history—oral histories with Vietnamese immigrants—this project will contribute to
future research on similar topics.

3
l.lozares
That was a fairly basic abstract that allows us to examine its individual parts more thoroughly.

Motivation/problem statement: The author identifies that previous research has been done
about the Vietnam War, but that it has failed to address the specific topic of South Vietnam’s
military. This is good because it shows how the author’s research fits into the bigger picture. It
isn’t a bad thing to be critical of other research, but be respectful from an academic standpoint
(i.e. “Previous researchers are stupid and don’t know what they’re talking about” sounds kind of
unprofessional).

Methods/procedure/approach: The author does a good job of explaining how she performed
her research, without giving unnecessary detail. Noting that she conducted qualitative interviews
with 40 subjects is significant, but she wisely does not explicitly state the kinds of questions
asked during the interview, which would be excessive.

Results/findings/product: The results make good use of numbering to clearly indicate what was
ascertained from the research—particularly useful, as people often just scan abstracts for the
results of an experiment.

Conclusion/implications: Since this paper is historical in nature, its findings may be hard to
extrapolate to modern-day phenomena, but the author identifies the importance of her work as
part of a growing body of research, which merits further investigation. This strategy functions to
encourage future research on the topic.

FINAL OUTPUT

Table of Contents

Acknowledgement

Abstract

Introduction

Method

4
l.lozares
Results

Discussions

Conclusions

Recommendations

References

Appendices

Separate paper

What is the meaning of “A bad beginning makes a bad ending”? Explain and
cite an example.

5
l.lozares