Chapter 4

• Part 1: Discussion (Content and Format)

• Part 2: Groupwork (Outlining of the
Chapter 4 content according to SDM
/theoretical background/framework used;
Compose comprehensive discussion of
results)
• Part 3: Consultation
 Learning Outcomes

• Be oriented with the outline of the manuscript for Chapter

4 (both for Thesis A and Thesis B);
• Outline the content of Chapter 4 according to the SDM
used (for Thesis B);
• Outline the content of Chapter 4 according to the
theoretical backgrounds/framework used (for Thesis A);
• Differentiate discussion vs. results; discussion vs.
background;
• Adopt the PIIILS in the results and discussion section of
the manuscript (both for Thesis A and Thesis B).
 Context

• This chapter discusses how the project

was performed , delivered and completed
following the recommended phases of the
SDM (Thesis B).
• This chapter discusses how the
comparative/experimental study was
performed accompanied by theoretical
proofs and evidences; the presentation of
results and the discussion of the findings.
 Context

• The SDM phases must include discussions

– on the initial design of the procedure (or system operation) by
illustration through data and process modeling,
– on the hardware and software resources needed to implement
and execute the system,
– on the design and implementation of the major data structure and
algorithms used in the development of the system,
– most importantly, the analysis, interpretation and implications of
the summarized test results as well as observations based on the
objectives of the study.
• The title of this chapter is also the running/working title of
the project (for Capstone Project /Thesis with Software
Development). For Thesis A , the title is Results and
Discussion.
 Outline

• Thesis (A)
• Thesis (B)
 Result Section

• Details the findings of the research.

Answering the following questions:
– What happened?
– What was found?
• Should set out your key experimental results,
including any statistical analysis and whether
or not the results of these are significant.
• Include no interpretation of the results, just
state the facts.
 Discussion Section

• Gives meaning to the results, the “why”

• Places results in context of theory or
conceptual framework
• Places results in context of previous research
• Assesses importance of findings
• Acknowledges limitations of methods
• Identifies new areas for exploration and/or
‘next steps’
 Discussion vs
Results
• Results are the facts of the findings, unedited and
unqualified
• Results are the presentation of the hard data
(statistics, tables, figures)
• Discussion is about what the results mean
• Discussion is about the implications of the findings
• Discussion is about how the findings fit into the
body of literature appropriately introduced in the
Background
 Structure of
Discussion(PIIILS)
1. Principal findings
2. Interpretation of findings
3. Interpretation in context of literature
4. Implications
5. Limitations
6. Summary
 Principal Findings

• Emphasis on “discussion”

• Summarize major findings

• Do not simply reiterate results

• Shift from numeric data to descriptive words

• Do not introduce additional or new results

 Interpretation

• What do the findings/results mean?

• Are the findings consistent with previous
research or do they counter previous
findings?
• Posit why this might be, particularly if your
findings differ from others
• Do not restate content from Background
• Focus on points of comparison that bear on
findings
 Implications

• How the results might be generalized

• Often implications mean clinical implications
• May have other implications (e.g.,
methodological)
• New things to consider as result of findings
Some view the Discussion as the most
important section because it is where we
explain the results and their meaning.
 Limitations

• Be thoughtful and reasonable

• Don’t beat yourself up
• Acknowledge issues of scientific concern
• Don’t trash the validity of your study

Goal is to preempt the reviewer’s criticism and

to demonstrate your knowledge of the
limitations and understanding of practical
limits and judgment calls in research.
 Summary

• The Summary of the Discussion section

may be the Conclusion
• Summary: summarizes the
findings/conclusion
• Conclusion: ultimate take-away message
The Discussion should answer the two
deadly questions facing all research:

So What?

Who Cares?
example
 Group work

• Task 1: Outline the content of Chapter 4

according to the SDM/theoretical
framework used;
• Task 2: Based from the given objective
and results compose a comprehensive
discussion by implementing the PIIILS.
Given
– Objective
• To determine the average encryption performance
of algorithm x and algorithm y in terms of speed.
 Results (Encryption
Runtime Speed)
Password Algorithm X Algorithm Y
skjuld 0.224505 ms 0.160361 ms
Belzebub 0.199276 ms 0.129144 ms
Bael 0.23819 ms 0. 12444 ms
Flouros 0.31559 ms 0.121874 ms
Zepar 1.071211 ms 0.111611 ms
Phenex 0.27411 ms 0 12615 ms
Asmodeus 0.582858 ms 0.138124 ms
Berith 0.171052 ms 0.118026 ms
Barbatos 0.279242 ms 0.115032 ms
hanuman 0.170197 ms 0.121019 ms