WRITING THE RESEARCH REPORT

Process of Research Report

WRITING THE RESEARCH REPORT

1. Begin writing up the report as soon as you can. Do not

leave it until you have finished your data collection before
you start writing up. Many sections, can be drafted during
or even before data collection.

2. Write down ideas as soon as you get them, rather than

leaving them to the writing-up stage. Keep a research
diary where you can safely note any ideas. Not all of your
ideas will be useful, but it is certain that some of them will
be! Do not imagine that you will be able to remember
these ideas at a later date.
3. Be aware of the nature of the report and the intended
audience. If it is for a student research project, then ensure
you have read and understood the criteria laid down by
your institution in terms of content, presentation, length and
so on.

4. If you are writing for a journal, ensure that your research

fits within the scope of that journal’s objectives as well as
its editorial requirements. If you are producing a report or
piece of consultancy, ensure that you are clear about the
requirements of your audience.
5. You will not be able to write the final report out first
time. You will need to rewrite it a number of times before
it reaches completion. You should allow for this when
planning your research timetable, and not become
discouraged when the first draft is not perfect.
6. Make sure before you begin writing up that you make
backups of your work at every available opportunity.
Whatever you do, do not assume that whatever you save
on a hard drive will be safe!

7. You should keep your backups in a separate location.

As a further safety measure, print out what you have
written so far at regular intervals.
THE STAGES OF WRITING A REPORT

1. First clarify the nature of the planned report, and its

intended audience. If any examples of past reports are
available, read as many as you can – both good and bad!

2. Identify any predetermined requirements, for example

maximum word length, formatting, such as double spacing or
required referencing style, and so on. Ideally you should
familiarise yourself with past projects, etc. so that you have
an idea of the final product before you start.
3. Throughout the duration of the research you should be
collecting together the information necessary to complete
the report, such as your review of literature, analysis of the
primary data, list of references and so on.

4. Prepare an outline plan of the report. At the bare

minimum, this should be a list of chapter headings. Ideally
you should be able to have more detail – include likely
subheadings as well. The more detailed your initial outline,
the easier you will find the process of writing up the first
draft of the report.
5. Write a first draft of the report. You should not anticipate
the first draft being your final submission!

6. Evaluate the content of the first draft, either through

reading it yourself or, preferably, getting somebody else to
read it with a critical eye.

7. Rewrite and re-evaluate the report as appropriate. You

may need to do this more than once!
8. Final editing and proof reading. Once you have got this
far, the temptation is to skip over the final proof reading and
simply submit the project. Do carefully read over to check
spelling and grammar.

9. Submission of the report!

TYPICAL RESEARCH REPORT STRUCTURE
1. Title Page
2. Abstract
3. Acknowledgements
4. Contents
- List of Tables
- List of Figures
- Acronyms
5. Introduction
- Background of the study
- Problem statement of the study
- Objective of the study
- Justification of the study
- Scope of the study
- Significance of the study
- Limitation of the study
- Organization of the paper
6. Literature Review
- Theoretical Literature Review
- Empirical Literature Review
- Conceptual Framework
7. Methodology
- Data
- Model Specification
- Estimation Method
8. Results, discussion and Analysis
9. Conclusions and Recommendations
11. Reference List
12. Appendices
ABSTRACT
• What your research aim was.
• Key background theory.
• What data were collected from whom, and how.
• How it was analysed /Method of Research/
• Key findings and recommendation
INTRODUCTION
• Background of the study
• Statement of the problem
• WHAT you have done – aims/objectives.
• WHY you have done it – justification.
• Scope of the study
• Significance of the study
• Limitation of the Study
• HOW you have presented the report – structure/
signposting.
LITERATURE REVIEW
• It consists of three components (Theoretical
Literature Review, Empirical Literature, and
Conceptual Framework)
• What do we know.
• What we do not know (research gap).
• How your study fits the research gap.
• What you may expect to find (hypotheses).
• Relate the literature to your study.
Be critical if appropriate.
METHODOLOGY

• Research design
• Sample (or Data )
• Model Specification
• Methods or econometric estimation Method
• Result, Discussion, and Analysis
METHODOLOGY
Have you explained the rationale behind your chosen
means of collecting information?
Are your research methods the most appropriate given
your chosen hypothesis or research question, and your
subsidiary questions or objectives?
Are you making assumptions? You know what you did in
terms of research methods – have you expressed yourself
clearly and given adequate details? Would someone else
be able to replicate your study on the basis of the
information you have given?
Any limitations? Anything you might have done differently?
RESULTS

There is no one correct way to present your results. Some

ways could be:

• Address each of your hypotheses, research questions.

• By independent and dependent variable.
• By research method.
• By participant (qualitative interviews).
RESULTS

• Tables essential for quantitative data.

• Graphs only if they add to understanding.
• Use quotes sparingly for qualitative data.
• Only report relevant results.
WRITING THE DISCUSSION

• Discuss the implications of your results in light of your

research objectives.
• Can be combined with results for a qualitative study.
• Common error = Discussing your own findings without
any reference to existing knowledge.
• Your research should build on existing knowledge so
refer back to the literature review.
• Do your findings find support in the literature?
• Were your findings predicted by the literature?
• How does your research add to the literature?
• If your findings differed from expectations, then are there
any possible explanations why?
• Does the particular theory or model you have used still
hold true in light of your research?
• If the theory or model seems flawed, then how can it be
refined in light of your research?
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

• What the key findings were.

• Should relate to aims/objectives in introduction.
• Recommend policies given statistically significance variables
in the model
• May include recommendations for future research (Identify
research Caveat and points for further studies).
REFERENCES
Must be consistent with text.

Include the following information

1. Author (might be an organisation not a person),
2. Title of page
3. Date (may have no date)
4. Date accessed. URL
Many different types of resources on the web
An online journal article
A working paper
A home page or website more generally
If you’ve read a pdf of an article online
e.g. via JSTOR just treat this as a journal
article, not a webpage
 Bibliographic styles
The Harvard citation system :
• This system is recommended at LSE for theses*
• Confusingly, sometimes called the Harvard style – but this is
the Harvard style of referencing, not a bibliographical style
• It is a method of citing in-text using author-date with
bibliographical references at the end in alphabetical order by
author. So, you can have the author-date in-text (Harvard
system) citations using the APA style, the Chicago style, etc.
• A second system = the Vancouver or Numbered system = in-
text citation using a number with bibliographical list at end in
numerical order
• A third system = footnotes with footnote references or
bibliography at the end
 What about formatting & word order?

• Now you’ve collected your references what

formatting should you choose?
• Bibliographic style is a personal choice and different
to the Harvard system
• It is about whether titles are italicized, authors full
names or initials are included
• There are lots of these to choose from or you can
create your own
• Look at other theses from your Department and
follow precedents for your discipline
• Be consistent!
• EndNote will do a lot of the hard work for you
if you use this.
• There are over 3000 bibliographic styles
supported by EndNote! The most well known
include:
– Chicago (known also as Turabian)
Commonly used in history and the natural sciences
– American Psychological Association (APA)
Commonly used in psychology and the social sciences
– Modern Languages Association (MLA)
Commonly used in the humanities - especially the
fields of literature and languages
• Formatting books-some examples
APA
(Bryson, 1995, p.12)
Bryson, B. (1995). Notes from a small island.
London: Black Swan.
Chicago
(Bryson 1995, 12)
Bryson, Bill. Notes from a small island. London :
Black Swan, 1995.
Formatting journal articles-some examples

APA Style
(Secker, 1997, p. 53)
Secker, J. (1997). The digital library: a new
perspective.
Journal of Documentation 13(2), 53-65

Chicago Style
(Secker 1997, 53)
Secker, Jane. (1997). The digital library: a
new perspective. Journal of Documentation
13 (2): 53-65.
• Formatting book chapters-some examples

APA Style:
Ullestad, N. (1992). Diverse rock rebellions
subvert mass media hegemony. In R. Garofalo
(Ed.), Rockin' the boat: mass music and mass
movements (pp.23-45). Boston: South End
Press
Chicago Style:
Ullestad, Neal. “Diverse rock rebellions subvert
mass media hegemony,” In Rockin' the boat: mass
music and mass movements, ed. R. Garofalo, 23-
45. Boston: South End Press, 1992.
Formatting web pages-some examples

APA
Freedland, J. (2004, June 8). Please, no
more 1960s. Retrieved 9 June 2004, from
Guardian Unlimited Website:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
Chicago
Freedland, Jonathan. 2004, June 8. Please, no
more 1960s. Guardian Unlimited.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Colum
n/0,5673,1234380,00.html
(accessed 9 June 2004).
Formatting theses-some examples
APA
Baker, M. S. (1994). The Parents' Music Resource
Center : symbolic conflict amidst structural decay
in the United States. University of Exeter, Exeter.
Chicago
Baker, Mark S. 1994. The Parents' Music Resource
Center : symbolic conflict amidst structural decay
in the United States, Department of Sociology,
University of Exeter, Exeter.
Quoting
• If you use a direct quotation from an author
you should make this clear with quotation
marks
• You should include the page number/s
• If a quote is more than two lines of text indent
the quote.
• Use three full stops to indicate any omitted
text but be careful not to change the meaning
• Be careful of longer quotes
Example of short quotation:
  
Patton (1995, p. 6) believes that “…evaluation is an
essential part of qualitative research” and this could be
argued to form the basis of his work.

Longer quotes are indented:

 
Several studies have been written in this field of
research methodology and it has been argued that:
“…evaluation is an essential part of qualitative research and should be
considered before the researcher begins to undertaken their fieldwork.
Moreover, it is a crucial stage in the process”.  (Patton, 1995, p. 6)
 
APPENDICES
• Must relate to the research, but not be
directly related
KEY WEAKNESSES

• Abstract – lacks specific detail.

• Introduction – no justification, aim and objectives unclear.

Lack of showing defining the problem, severity and extent of
the problem

• Literature review – not related to the research question, no

critical awareness, limited sources, limited relevance,
inappropriate theory. Lack of conceptual framework

• Methodology – lacking specific detail, justification, limited

awareness of reliability, validity, generalisability.
• Results – focus on graphs, limited analysis, lacking
relevance.

• Discussion – not revisiting the literature, simply repeating

results, lack of awareness of the implications of the
findings.

• Conclusions – unrelated to results/discussion.

 Examples of plagiarism
• Cutting and pasting from other documents.
• Quoting without quotation marks or references.
• Paraphrasing without referencing.
• Summarising without referencing.
• Using an image, source and/or diagram without
referencing.
• Taking another student’s ideas and passing them off as
your own.
• Re-cycling your own work which has been submitted for
assessment elsewhere.
• Collaborating on what should be individual work.
• Translating a document from another language
GENERAL PRESENTATION WEAKNESSES

• Word limits not adhered to.

• Inappropriate formatting.

• Inappropriate use of visual material.

• Incorrect spelling and grammar.

• Lack of signposting/linking.
ASSESSING YOUR RESEARCH REPORT

SETTING THE SCENE

Does your abstract give a clear idea of what is in the

report? Has it clearly described your objectives, the
methodology adopted, and the main conclusions that have
emerged?
Is your table of contents well structured and does it give a
picture of what is included? Have you included a list of
tables and a list of figures if appropriate?
In your introduction have you introduced your research
adequately?
FOCUS AND JUSTIFICATION
Have you a clear focus? Is your research report tightly
defined and contained or does it sometimes lack direct
relevance, or stray off the point?

Have you got a clearly constructed and suitable research

question or hypothesis which leads to a set of clear and
related subsidiary questions or objectives?
YOUR USE OF THE LITERATURE

• Is your issue or focus underpinned by theory? Is it clear

which theory or model you have adopted?
• How up to date are your references? Have you included
the most up to date work in your area?
• Have you managed to identify and get hold of the work of
key writers in your particular area? Have you ensured that
you have paid due attention to ‘classic’ sources?
• Have you used a variety of sources or are you over-reliant
upon certain authors? Have you included or acknowledged
competing theories or viewpoints, or simply selected
literature that supports your hypothesis?
• Is it clear to the reader how your research relates to what
has been done before, or builds upon existing knowledge?
• In your literature review do you merely identify and
describe, with no real critical edge? Have you been
analytical enough?
• How well have you researched the literature on your topic
and on your specific focus?
• Have you explored all possible sources?
YOUR METHODOLOGY

• Do you clearly identify and explain your choice of research

design?
• Are your research methods the most appropriate given your
chosen hypothesis or research question, and your subsidiary
questions or objectives?
• Have you made it clear who the subjects are? And to what
population these subjects belong? Is it clear how they were
selected?
• Have you explained the rationale behind your chosen means
of collecting information? If it is an existing instrument, whose
is it? Why did you choose it? Is it clear to the reader why your
methods were the most appropriate ones for your research
question?
• Are you making assumptions? You know what you did in
terms of research methods, but would the reader? Have you
expressed yourself clearly and given adequate details? Would
someone else be able to replicate your study on the basis of
the information you have given?
• Have you clearly identified the strengths of your
methodology? Are there any limitations to your methodology?
Is there anything you might have done differently?
RESULTS, DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

• Are your findings clearly presented? Have you included

tables for your descriptive and inferential analysis of
quantitative data?
• If you have included graphs, charts and so on, are these
appropriate? Is the content of each chart clear? Is it clear
how each chart relates to your research objectives?
• How have you analysed your findings? If you have
undertaken quantitative analysis, which statistical tests
have you used? Are you sure these are the correct tests?
Have you interpreted the results correctly?
• For qualitative analysis, have you demonstrated that you
have analysed your data in a systematic manner?
• In your discussion, do you adequately revisit the literature
and relate your findings to the literature, or do you simply
discuss what you found?
• Are your arguments coherent, logical and sound? Are they
consistent with the evidence that you have collected?
• Have your conclusions clearly emerged from the evidence
collected and discussed? Have you acknowledged
unexpected evidence, or evidence that contradicts your
chosen theory or model?
• Do you return to your research question or hypothesis?
• Do you evaluate the research? Have you identified the
strengths and the limitations of the project?
GENERAL PRESENTATION OF THE REPORT

• Is your content well planned and logically structured?

• Is the work well presented?
• Have you made appropriate use of supportive materials to
enhance presentation, i.e. graphs, tables, illustrations?
• Have you conducted a thorough read through, to eliminate
careless spelling and typographical errors, poor grammar
and poor sentence construction?
• Do you link your various chapters and make use of
signposting to help the reader? Do you set out your
intentions clearly in your introduction?
• Have you set out your references and/or bibliography
with the required detail and in the recommended format?
• Have you acknowledged all sources used, and made it
clear when it is your views that are being expressed, or
the views of others?
• Have you made appropriate use of appendices? Are
there any unnecessary appendices?
• Have you ensured that your report is as stimulating and
as interesting as possible? Have you conveyed your
enthusiasm to the reader throughout the project?
Thank You