Why is filling this gap important? How will answering this question move the field forward? After identifying the problem, state the main reason that this study was needed. Describe how answering this specific research question will make a significant contribution to your field.
Example: EGFR-overexpressing cancers are highly aggressive and have a higher tendency to metastasize. Currently, available drugs specifically target the EGFR and elicit high response rates. However, the majority of patients eventually develop progressive disease. The mechanisms through which cancers escape EGFR-targeted therapies remain unclear.
Identification of specific molecules that mediate resistance to EGFR-directed treatments will facilitate the development of novel therapies and may improve responses to currently available therapies. Paragraph 2: This paragraph provides a critical analysis of your major finding s. What was your overall approach for studying the gap? In one or two sentences, state the main models or strategies that you used to study this specific research question.
This should recapitulate whether the work included animals, cell culture, human subjects, or other novel techniques.
Some investigators prefer to place this section at the end of the first paragraph. This decision may vary depending on the specific study. What was the most important result of your study? The focus of this paragraph is to highlight the most important contribution that your study has made. Explicitly state this result. Additional findings major and minor can be described in subsequent paragraphs. Do not write a literature review or general introduction to scholarship on the topic.
If one is required for the manuscript, it should appear earlier usually before methods are described and results are reported and should not play a major part in decisions about how to write the scientific discussion. The point of citing previously published studies in a scientific discussion is to compare and contrast earlier results and interpretations with the current findings and explanations. While the most relevant studies should therefore inform the discussion, the ideas and arguments of other scientists should not guide or dominate the discussion.
Exploring Implications Do explore the implications of the research and especially the findings. Be specific and consider the potential impact in several directions — the implications not only for other researchers, for instance, but also for practitioners, clients, patients, communities and decision makers in a range of fields.
Most scientific papers will not stretch beyond a few key implications, but explaining the real value of meaningful results is part of the goal of writing a scientific discussion, so serious reflection is necessary. A return to introductory material about why the research was needed is standard practice and can help clarify the implications of the results.
Do not exaggerate the significance of the results and their implications. While some implications may be speculative and still make useful and engaging discussion material for readers and researchers, most implications should be more firmly rooted, whether they affect the research procedures of future investigators, the practices of healthcare workers or the daily lives of single parents. Explaining a real impact, even if it is small, is of much greater value than wasting words on an unconvincing large one that will only serve to undermine a scientific discussion in the eyes of instructors, editors and peer reviewers.
Acknowledging Limitations Do acknowledge the weaknesses and limitations of the research design. All scientific research has limitations, whether intentional or unintentional, and they must be discussed in relation to the results and their validity. Limitations affect the way in which findings can be interpreted, applied and generalised, so clearly explaining them can be useful for other researchers, and so can suggesting possible improvements and modifications to the research design.
A scientist demonstrates the ability to think critically and objectively about his or her own research by acknowledging its limitations, and new directions for future research often grow from limitations discovered or clarified during the research process. Do not make the limitations and weaknesses of a study the central or focal point in the discussion. Be sure to include the hypotheses you tested, controls, treatments, variables measured, how many replicates you had, what you actually measured, what form the data take, etc.
Always identify treatments by the variable or treatment name, NOT by an ambiguous, generic name or number e. When your paper includes more than one experiment, use subheadings to help organize your presentation by experiment. A general experimental design worksheet is available to help plan your experiments in the core courses.
Describe the procedures for your study in sufficient detail that other scientists could repeat your work to verify your findings. Foremost in your description should be the "quantitative" aspects of your study - the masses, volumes, incubation times, concentrations, etc. When using standard lab or field methods and instrumentation, it is not always necessary to explain the procedures e. You may want to identify certain types of equipment by vendor name and brand or category e. It is appropriate to report, parenthetically, the source vendor and catalog number for reagents used, e.
Always make sure to describe any modifications you have made of a standard or published method. NOTE: Very frequently the experimental design and data collection procedures for an experiment cannot be separated and must be integrated together. If you find yourself repeating lots of information about the experimental design when describing the data collection procedure s , likely you can combine them and be more concise.
Of course you did, because that is what all good scientists do, and it is a given that you recorded your measurements and observations. Describe how the data were summarized and analyzed. Regardless of where it's mentioned, a good discussion section includes analysis of any unexpected findings. This part of the discussion should begin with a description of the unanticipated finding, followed by a brief interpretation as to why you believe it appeared and, if necessary, its possible significance in relation to the overall study.
If more than one unexpected finding emerged during the study, describe each of them in the order they appeared as you gathered or analyzed the data. As noted, the exception to discussing findings in the same order you described them in the results section would be to begin by highlighting the implications of a particularly unexpected or significant finding that emerged from the study, followed by a discussion of the remaining findings.
Before concluding the discussion, identify potential limitations and weaknesses if you do not plan to do so in the conclusion of the paper. Comment on their relative importance in relation to your overall interpretation of the results and, if necessary, note how they may affect the validity of your findings. Avoid using an apologetic tone; however, be honest and self-critical [e.
The discussion section should end with a concise summary of the principal implications of the findings regardless of their significance.
Give a brief explanation about why you believe the findings and conclusions of your study are important and how they support broader knowledge or understanding of the research problem. This can be followed by any recommendations for further research. However, do not offer recommendations which could have been easily addressed within the study.
This would demonstrate to the reader that you have inadequately examined and interpreted the data. Overall Objectives The objectives of your discussion section should include the following: I. You should write a direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results, usually in one paragraph. Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important Consider the likelihood that no one has thought as long and hard about your study as you have.
Systematically explain the underlying meaning of your findings and state why you believe they are significant. If applicable, begin this part of the section by repeating what you consider to be your most significant or unanticipated finding first, then systematically review each finding.
Otherwise, follow the general order you reported the findings in the results section. Relate the Findings to Similar Studies No study in the social sciences is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to previously published research. The discussion section should relate your results to those found in other studies, particularly if questions raised from prior studies served as the motivation for your research.
This is important because comparing and contrasting the findings of other studies helps to support the overall importance of your results and it highlights how and in what ways your study differs from other research about the topic. Note that any significant or unanticipated finding is often because there was no prior research to indicate the finding could occur.
If there is prior research to indicate this, you need to explain why it was significant or unanticipated. Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings It is important to remember that the purpose of research in the social sciences is to discover and not to prove.Ask a UC Librarian Writing a "good" discussion college essay organizer internship interview This is is usually the hardest section discussion write. Writing are trying scientific bring out the true meaning of your data without being too long. Do not use words paper conceal your facts or reasoning. Also research not repeat your results, this is a discussion. Define why you think this is so. A paper Discussion section provides a great deal of analytical depth. Your goal should be to critically analyze and interpret the findings of your study. You should place your findings in the context of published discussion and describe how research study moves the field forward. It is often easy to organize writing key elements of scientific Discussion section into distinct paragraphs or groups of paragraphs.
If you have performed experiments at a particular location or lab because it is the only place to do it, or one of a few, then you should note that in your methods and identify the lab or facility. Use the present verb tense, especially for established facts; however, refer to specific works and references in the past tense. Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important Consider the likelihood that no one has thought as long and hard about your study as you have. For example, did you use mouse pups or adults? Identification of specific molecules that mediate resistance to EGFR-directed treatments will facilitate the development of novel therapies and may improve responses to currently available therapies. Interpretation is a subjective exercise.