Writing a Discussion

Created by Anna M Borgström

Adapted by Gabriella Ekman gabriella.ekman@ki.se
Karolinska Institutet – Academic Writing Support
Website: kib.ki.se/en/write-cite/academic-writing
Contact us: sprakverkstaden@ki.se
Today’s Workshop

 The Function of the Discussion

 The Relationship between the Discussion and other Parts of the

Thesis

 Common Components of the Discussion

 Sample Text

 Opportunity to work on your own writing

The Function of the Discussion

 What is the function of the discussion? Respond in

the Chatbox.
From the Instructions for the Degree Project
in Bioentrepreneurship, 2018-19
Discussion
 ”This is where you are expected to express your own
opinion, based on the findings of the study. How you
interpret your results is usually more important than
the results themselves. The discussion should spell
out the major findings of the work along with
reflections on what the data tells you and the
significance of these. What are the implications of
your results?”
Instructions, cont.
To break that down…

 Major findings
 Interpret your major findings

Additional questions (also from the Instructions)

 ”What is the significance and meaning of the
results?”
 ”What ambiguities exist?”
 ”What logical explanations do you have for problems
in the data?”
The Function of the Discussion:
 In the Discussion, you interpret your results and
place them in a larger context.
What do your results mean? How are they
relevant?
The Relationship between the Discussion
and other parts of your text

All parts of an academic text are connected…

Structure of the Master´s Thesis

Introduction

Method

Results

and

Discussion
(Conclusion)
The Relationship between the Introduction
and the Discussion

 Remember: What you discuss in your discussion

should be what you promised to study in the
introduction.
The Relationship between the Discussion
and the Introduction
The purpose of both the introduction and the discussion is to place
your study within a broader context. However, each section does
so in slightly different ways.

 Introduction: What was known before you conducted your

study? How does your proposed study fit into the field?

 Discussion: What can be said about the field after you

conducted your study? What does your study add to the field?
The Relationship between the Discussion
and the Results
Remember: Your Discussion should not merely repeat your results.

Instead, the Discussion interprets, extrapolates, speculates and

offers conclusions based on your results. It tells the “story” of those
results for your reader.

Questions the Discussion answers:

What do your results mean? What do they imply?

Only offer speculations supported by your results!

The Relationship between the
Discussion and the Conclusion

REMEMBER: Your conclusion should not merely

summarize your results. If that was all a conclusion did,
the discussion part would be unnecessary.

Instead, your conclusion should reflect a careful

consideration of your results, based on your discussion.

What do your results indicate?

Common Components of the Discussion
 Summary of the main findings of your study (the first paragraph)

 Interpretation of your results.

 Comparisons between your findings and other studies in the

field.

 (Strengths) and limitations of your study.

 The future:
 implications of your findings
 further studies.
From the Instructions
Discussion
 ”If applicable, begin with a short summary of the results that
mirror your aim and research questions”
 ”Compare and contrast your results with previous studies in the
field”

Overarching questions
 ”What are the implications of your findings?”
 ”What might the findings mean in a bigger bioentrepreneurial
perspective?”
If this is the Structure of the Introduction…
…the Discussion is structured in the
reverse…

 First paragraph summarizes and

interprets key findings

 Comparisons to other studies

 Contribution to the field, future studies

Always check your guidelines…

…and any other related material, such as the

examiner’s report.

Read these several times as you write!

The Structure of the Discussion

REMEMBER:
Your aim, objectives and research questions form the apex of all
parts of the thesis. These should always be the focus of your text.

In the Discussion this is still true; you now answer your research
questions and focus on the implications of your study.

To organize all the separate parts of your Discussion, use topic

sentences and transition words
The Structure of the Discussion

THE PARAGRAPH:

• Every paragraph should develop one idea

• Suggestion: Group similar sentences together; use transition words
and transitional phrases to connect ideas and sentences within a
paragraph
• Every paragraph should have a specific purpose

• You signal the purpose of the paragraph through the topic

sentence – the first (sometimes the first and second) sentence of
the paragraph

• All the other sentences in the paragraph should develop the idea
indicated in the topic sentence
Common Components of the Discussion

 Think of the first paragraph as a ”shortcut” into the

text.
 One common structure:
Restate your aim, possibly with a reference to the
research gap
Summarise your major findings, without
interpreting them

Tip: Review checklists, instructions, theses or articles

written in your field
Exercise 1: Compare these two opening paragraphs

 Paragraph A. We trapped and counted the number of mosquitoes

within the urban environment of the city of Kumasi using conventional
carbon dioxide traps. Nearly 70% more adult A. gambiae were caught
in communities near moist urban agricultural establishments than in
rural locations or in locations without irrigated urban settlements. When
we evaluated malaria episode reports from people living in various
parts of the city, we found that 18% of malaria cases in all seasons
were reported by those near urban agricultural sites, whereas only 2%
of the control groups reported incidences of malaria per year.

 Paragraph B. The results of this study showed that open-space

irrigated vegetable fields in cities can provide suitable breeding grounds
for A. gambiae. This is reflected in higher numbers of adult A. gambiae
in settlements in the vicinity of irrigated urban agricultural sites
compared to control areas without irrigated urban agriculture.
Moreover, people living in the vicinity of urban agricultural areas
reported more malaria episodes than the control group in the rainy as
well as dry seasons. Apparently, informal irrigation sites of the urban
agricultural locations create rural spots within the city of Kumasi that
are potential Anopheles spp. breeding sites.
From Angelika Hoffman, Scientific Writing and Communication Oxford UP, 2014
Common Components of the Discussion

 As you analyse your findings, speculate (based on

your results), but strengthen your suggestions
through references to other studies

 When you speculate, be sure to use hedging words.

These help you nuance your discussion. Examples:
may, perhaps, could be, potentially.

But do not use too many of these words –

you risk sounding vague.
Common Components of the Discussion
 The results of this study showed that open-space
irrigated vegetable fields in cities can provide
suitable breeding grounds for A. gambiae. This is
reflected in higher numbers of adult A. gambiae in
settlements in the vicinity of irrigated urban
agricultural sites compared to control areas without
irrigated urban agriculture. Moreover, people living in
the vicinity of urban agricultural areas reported more
malaria episodes than the control group in the rainy
as well as dry seasons. Apparently, informal
irrigation sites of the urban agricultural locations
create rural spots within the city of Kumasi that are
potential Anopheles spp. breeding sites.
Common Components of the Discussion

 Summary of the main findings of your study (the first paragraph)

 Interpretation of your results.

 Comparison between your results and other studies in the field.

 Strengths and limitations of your study.

 The future:
 implications of your findings
 further studies.
Common Components of the Discussion

Comparisons between your results and other studies in the field.

 Do not merely compare results, but make sure to discuss any

differences/similarities.

 If your results are different from those of another study, why is

that? If you look at both studies, what can you infer?

 If the results of your study are similar to those of another study,

what does that mean? Are there still uncertainties and/or
limitations? Is there anything you can add?
Common Components of the Discussion

EXERCISE 2
 Read the first 5 paragraphs of ”The effect of the Pharma 2020
agenda…” (from 4 to 4.1.2.)

As you read, consider the following questions. Once you have read,
start jotting down responses or thoughts in the Chatbox.
 Broadly, how effective do you think the discussion is, as a
discussion? Why?
 Is the relationship between the writer‘s own findings and that of
other studies clear in each paragraph?
 How effective is the structure? Does each paragraph logically and
clearly transition to the next? Are there effective topic sentences?
Does each paragraph discuss one cohesive and well-developed
idea?
How effective is this paragraph?
 The government-owned Pharma 2020 agenda was
found to impact two key features of the
internationalisation process: the decision to enter the
Russian market and the market entry mode chosen.
In line with this, previous studies have shown that
local government strategies can influence the
internationalisation of foreign companies in different
ways. Depending on what type of product being
internationalised (…) the Pharma 2020 agenda has a
different impact on the internationalisation process.
For example, there is an extensive difference
between the effect of the agenda on a VEDL product
in comparison to an OTC product.
The government-owned Pharma 2020 agenda was found to impact
two key features of the internationalisation process: the decision to
enter the Russian market and the market entry mode chosen. In
line with this, previous studies have shown that local government
strategies can influence the internationalisation of foreign
companies in different ways. Depending on what type of product
being internationalised (…) the Pharma 2020 agenda has a
different impact on the internationalisation process. For example,
there is an extensive difference between the effect of the agenda
on a VEDL product in comparison to an OTC product.

 Strong, clear topic sentence

 Reference to similarities with previous studies
 Results are discussed, not just stated and compared – but
 Transition to ”depending on what type of product…” could have been
clarified – contradiction? Transition to the author’s own study?
How effective is this paragraph?

Dunning’s Eclectic Theory is based around three specific advantages:

ownership, locational and internationalisation advantages. Through this
theory, Agarwal and Ramaswami (49) suggest that during
internationalisation, SMES tend to adopt licensing and importing market
entry modes, whereas larger MNCs embrace joint venture or foreign
direct investment approaches (49). Contrary to this, this study found that
joint ventures are popular methods adopted by many internationalising
SMEs into Russia. By forming a joint venture, SMEs benefit from
financial risk sharing and increased market accessibility. Additionally,
because of the size of the country, for an SME to be able to capture the
full potential of the Russian market, a domestic partner is a necessity.
The Pharma 2020 agenda also slightly influences the advantages of the
SME. Internationalisation advantages refer to when a firm retains their
assets and skills within the company, rather than contracting them out.
However, because of the Pharma 2020 agenda, many SMEs are finding
more advantages in forming joint ventures with local firms, than
producing their products on their own in Russia. Therefore…
How effective is this paragraph?

Dunning’s Eclectic Theory is based around three specific advantages:

ownership, locational and internationalisation advantages. Through this
theory, Agarwal and Ramaswami (49) suggest that during
internationalisation, SMES tend to adopt licensing and importing market
entry modes, whereas larger MNCs embrace joint venture or foreign
direct investment approaches (49). Contrary to this, this study found that
joint ventures are popular methods adopted by many internationalising
SMEs into Russia. By forming a joint venture, SMEs benefit from
financial risk sharing and increased market accessibility. Additionally,
because of the size of the country, for an SME to be able to capture the
full potential of the Russian market, a domestic partner is a necessity.
The Pharma 2020 agenda also slightly influences the advantages of the
SME. Internationalisation advantages refer to when a firm retains their
assets and skills within the company, rather than contracting them out.
However, because of the Pharma 2020 agenda, many SMEs are finding
more advantages in forming joint ventures with local firms, than
producing their products on their own in Russia. Therefore…
What works

 Discusses results, does not just compare and then move on

 Reference to theory and to previous studies vs. the author’s own
findings is clear
 Effective use of transition words, transitional phrases and of
starting with what is already known to the reader in order to
intorduce new information – all of this ties the paragraph
together and helps the author develop a coherent idea
 Focused: throughout the paragraph, the focus is on what the
SMEs do, can do, etc. SMEs are the subjects of most of the
sentences in the paragraph

What could have worked better?

 Topic sentence?
 Transition from previous paragraph?
Exercise: Consider your own text

 What were your main findings? (First paragraph)

 How do the results of your study relate to previous research?

 Do your findings support previous research? What does that
suggest?
 Contradict previous research? What does that suggest?

 Jot down notes or ideas; alternately, review earlier writing and

revise – think about structure, cohesion, transitions and focus.
 Make sure you are genuinely discussing your findings and their
relationship to other studies.
Qualitative Studies and the Discussion
Examples of how to refer to results from a qualitative study in the
Discussion:

 ”All of the individuals interviewed for this study highlighted the

difficulties that X and Y pose to expanding market access into
Another Country. This confirms previous research...”

 ”However, two expert interviewees (F and G) suggested X and

Y would facilitate the expansion of pharmaceutical companies
into Another Country. This contradicts previous research…”
Common Components of the Discussion

Strengths and limitations

 Here, as elsewhere, aim for a balanced discussion. Do not just
note that something was a limitation – discuss.

From your Instructions:

 ”The limitations are the things that have affected your study and
that were out of your control. The limitations can be
methodological or subject-specific. Make sure to describe and
reflect thoroughly about how you could have avoided and
handled them. They might place restrictions on your proposed
methods or conclusions. Do not be overly critical: discuss
potential problems in a nuanced manner ”

Remember: All studies are limited!

Common Components of the Discussion
EXERCISE

Read the “Limitations” section of the extract from the sample thesis,
“The effect of the Pharma 2020 Agenda…”

As you read, consider the following questions. Then start jotting

down responses or thoughts in the Chatbox.

 Do the “Limitations” meet the stated criteria? That is, does the
author describe the limitations and “reflect on how s/he could
have handled or resolved them?” Does the author “discuss
potential problems in a nuanced manner?”
 Do all the limitations mentioned seem equally significant?
Achieving a Balanced Discussion:
Transition Words

Use transition words to achieve a balanced discussion.

They help you indicate how different paragraphs or
sentences belong together:

• In addition, …
• Similarly, …
• However, …
• By contrast, …

*You can find a list of useful transition words here:

writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/Transitions.html
Common Components of the Discussion:
Future Research

From the Instructions: “You need to state how future research can
build on your observations”

Question: What are the implications of your findings for future research
in the field?

 The “future research” section is the broadest part of your discussion

 BUT, as you discuss future studies, these should still be clearly and
specifically linked to the findings of your study.
Common Components of the Discussion:
Future Research
Be as specific as possible:

“It would be interesting to investigate the role of X further…”

“This study indicates that X may be central to Y. A further investigation

of the relationship between X and Y is needed to shed new light on…”

From sample text: “To build on the observations and inferences of

this study, a comparative study could be carried out, whereby the
internationalisation process into Russia of SMEs is compared to
MNCs, in light of the Pharma 2020 agenda…”
The Relationship between the
Discussion and the Conclusion
 Remember: yes, your conclusion should briefly
summarise your results. However, that is not all a
conclusion does. If it was, the discussion part would
be unnecessary.

 Instead, your conclusion should reflect a careful

consideration of your results based on your
discussion.

 This is the part where you fulfil your aim!

From your Instructions

Conclusion
 ”The conclusion should be a short summary of the results based
on your own findings. You should summarise how you were able
to answer your research question(s). No new information or
references are added here. Conclusions that are established by
the presented data, hypotheses supported by the presented
data, and speculations suggested by the presented data should
be clearly identified as such.”

 ”Ideally, your study will result in recommendations or possible

solutions to the situation you started out with. These should be
as practical and precise as possible…”
Writing the Discussion – Review
 Restate your aim and summarise main findings in the first paragraph
 Interpret your results. Do not list! interpret and discuss key and most
significant findings
 Compare your findings to other studies in the field, placing your
study within the broader context of the field itself. Again, do not
simply compare or contrast – discuss what the similarities or
differences suggest
 Discuss the limitations of your study in a nuanced manner.
 Discuss any implications for future research – be specific
 Conclusion consists of short summary of results based on your
discussion, and, possibly, “practical and precise” recommendations
 Use hedging phrases for nuance (may, it is possible that, perhaps)
 Use transition words and transitional phrases
 Use topic sentences and well-structured, unified paragraphs
Academic Writing Support
 45 minutes per session, 2-3 sessions per text
 Pairs and groups are fine
 Solna and online
 Drop-in Solna 12-13.00 every Wednesday – at KIB-labb
 Make an appointment at kib.ki.se/en or go directly to
tools.kib.ki.se/en
 How it works: if you have made an appointment, you send us
your text at least one working day before the appointed time. For
drop-in sessions, you simply show up with your text.
 Email: sprakverkstaden@kib.ki.se

 Can’t get an appointment? Keep checking! Cancellations

occur frequently, and often at the last minute. You can also try
M
our drop-in service.

26 april 2019 43
 KIB Master´s Workshops

 Effective Peer Review May 16

 How to Transform your Master’s May 27 and

Thesis into a Publishable Article June 4

Namn Efternamn 26 april 2019 44

 Questions?

Namn Efternamn 26 april 2019 45