method section in research

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

How to Write a Methods Section for a Psychology Paper

Tips and Examples of an APA Methods Section

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Emily is a board-certified science editor who has worked with top digital publishing brands like Voices for Biodiversity, Study.com, GoodTherapy, Vox, and Verywell.

Verywell / Brianna Gilmartin 

The methods section of an APA format psychology paper provides the methods and procedures used in a research study or experiment . This part of an APA paper is critical because it allows other researchers to see exactly how you conducted your research.

Method refers to the procedure that was used in a research study. It included a precise description of how the experiments were performed and why particular procedures were selected. While the APA technically refers to this section as the 'method section,' it is also often known as a 'methods section.'

The methods section ensures the experiment's reproducibility and the assessment of alternative methods that might produce different results. It also allows researchers to replicate the experiment and judge the study's validity.

This article discusses how to write a methods section for a psychology paper, including important elements to include and tips that can help.

What to Include in a Method Section

So what exactly do you need to include when writing your method section? You should provide detailed information on the following:

• Research design
• Participants
• Participant behavior

The method section should provide enough information to allow other researchers to replicate your experiment or study.

Components of a Method Section

The method section should utilize subheadings to divide up different subsections. These subsections typically include participants, materials, design, and procedure.

Participants 

In this part of the method section, you should describe the participants in your experiment, including who they were (and any unique features that set them apart from the general population), how many there were, and how they were selected. If you utilized random selection to choose your participants, it should be noted here.

For example: "We randomly selected 100 children from elementary schools near the University of Arizona."

At the very minimum, this part of your method section must convey:

• Basic demographic characteristics of your participants (such as sex, age, ethnicity, or religion)
• The population from which your participants were drawn
• Any restrictions on your pool of participants
• How many participants were assigned to each condition and how they were assigned to each group (i.e., randomly assignment , another selection method, etc.)
• Why participants took part in your research (i.e., the study was advertised at a college or hospital, they received some type of incentive, etc.)

Information about participants helps other researchers understand how your study was performed, how generalizable the result might be, and allows other researchers to replicate the experiment with other populations to see if they might obtain the same results.

In this part of the method section, you should describe the materials, measures, equipment, or stimuli used in the experiment. This may include:

• Testing instruments
• Technical equipment
• Any psychological assessments that were used
• Any special equipment that was used

For example: "Two stories from Sullivan et al.'s (1994) second-order false belief attribution tasks were used to assess children's understanding of second-order beliefs."

For standard equipment such as computers, televisions, and videos, you can simply name the device and not provide further explanation.

Specialized equipment should be given greater detail, especially if it is complex or created for a niche purpose. In some instances, such as if you created a special material or apparatus for your study, you might need to include an illustration of the item in the appendix of your paper.

In this part of your method section, describe the type of design used in the experiment. Specify the variables as well as the levels of these variables. Identify:

• The independent variables
• Dependent variables
• Control variables
• Any extraneous variables that might influence your results.

Also, explain whether your experiment uses a  within-groups  or between-groups design.

For example: "The experiment used a 3x2 between-subjects design. The independent variables were age and understanding of second-order beliefs."

The next part of your method section should detail the procedures used in your experiment. Your procedures should explain:

• What the participants did
• How data was collected
• The order in which steps occurred

For example: "An examiner interviewed children individually at their school in one session that lasted 20 minutes on average. The examiner explained to each child that he or she would be told two short stories and that some questions would be asked after each story. All sessions were videotaped so the data could later be coded."

Keep this subsection concise yet detailed. Explain what you did and how you did it, but do not overwhelm your readers with too much information.

Tips for How to Write a Methods Section

In addition to following the basic structure of an APA method section, there are also certain things you should remember when writing this section of your paper. Consider the following tips when writing this section:

• Use the past tense : Always write the method section in the past tense.
• Be descriptive : Provide enough detail that another researcher could replicate your experiment, but focus on brevity. Avoid unnecessary detail that is not relevant to the outcome of the experiment.
• Use an academic tone : Use formal language and avoid slang or colloquial expressions. Word choice is also important. Refer to the people in your experiment or study as "participants" rather than "subjects."
• Use APA format : Keep a style guide on hand as you write your method section. The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association is the official source for APA style.
• Make connections : Read through each section of your paper for agreement with other sections. If you mention procedures in the method section, these elements should be discussed in the results and discussion sections.
• Proofread : Check your paper for grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.. typos, grammar problems, and spelling errors. Although a spell checker is a handy tool, there are some errors only you can catch.

After writing a draft of your method section, be sure to get a second opinion. You can often become too close to your work to see errors or lack of clarity. Take a rough draft of your method section to your university's writing lab for additional assistance.

A Word From Verywell

The method section is one of the most important components of your APA format paper. The goal of your paper should be to clearly detail what you did in your experiment. Provide enough detail that another researcher could replicate your study if they wanted.

Finally, if you are writing your paper for a class or for a specific publication, be sure to keep in mind any specific instructions provided by your instructor or by the journal editor. Your instructor may have certain requirements that you need to follow while writing your method section.

Frequently Asked Questions

While the subsections can vary, the three components that should be included are sections on the participants, the materials, and the procedures.

• Describe who the participants were in the study and how they were selected.
• Define and describe the materials that were used including any equipment, tests, or assessments
• Describe how the data was collected

To write your methods section in APA format, describe your participants, materials, study design, and procedures. Keep this section succinct, and always write in the past tense. The main heading of this section should be labeled "Method" and it should be centered, bolded, and capitalized. Each subheading within this section should be bolded, left-aligned and in title case.

The purpose of the methods section is to describe what you did in your experiment. It should be brief, but include enough detail that someone could replicate your experiment based on this information. Your methods section should detail what you did to answer your research question. Describe how the study was conducted, the study design that was used and why it was chosen, and how you collected the data and analyzed the results.

Erdemir F. How to write a materials and methods section of a scientific article ? Turk J Urol . 2013;39(Suppl 1):10-5. doi:10.5152/tud.2013.047

Kallet RH. How to write the methods section of a research paper . Respir Care . 2004;49(10):1229-32. PMID: 15447808.

American Psychological Association.  Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association  (7th ed.). Washington DC: The American Psychological Association; 2019.

American Psychological Association. APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards . Published 2020.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 6. The Methodology
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

The methods section describes actions taken to investigate a research problem and the rationale for the application of specific procedures or techniques used to identify, select, process, and analyze information applied to understanding the problem, thereby, allowing the reader to critically evaluate a study’s overall validity and reliability. The methodology section of a research paper answers two main questions: How was the data collected or generated? And, how was it analyzed? The writing should be direct and precise and always written in the past tense.

Kallet, Richard H. "How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper." Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004): 1229-1232.

Importance of a Good Methodology Section

You must explain how you obtained and analyzed your results for the following reasons:

• Readers need to know how the data was obtained because the method you chose affects the results and, by extension, how you interpreted their significance in the discussion section of your paper.
• Methodology is crucial for any branch of scholarship because an unreliable method produces unreliable results and, as a consequence, undermines the value of your analysis of the findings.
• In most cases, there are a variety of different methods you can choose to investigate a research problem. The methodology section of your paper should clearly articulate the reasons why you have chosen a particular procedure or technique.
• The reader wants to know that the data was collected or generated in a way that is consistent with accepted practice in the field of study. For example, if you are using a multiple choice questionnaire, readers need to know that it offered your respondents a reasonable range of answers to choose from.
• The method must be appropriate to fulfilling the overall aims of the study. For example, you need to ensure that you have a large enough sample size to be able to generalize and make recommendations based upon the findings.
• The methodology should discuss the problems that were anticipated and the steps you took to prevent them from occurring. For any problems that do arise, you must describe the ways in which they were minimized or why these problems do not impact in any meaningful way your interpretation of the findings.
• In the social and behavioral sciences, it is important to always provide sufficient information to allow other researchers to adopt or replicate your methodology. This information is particularly important when a new method has been developed or an innovative use of an existing method is utilized.

Bem, Daryl J. Writing the Empirical Journal Article. Psychology Writing Center. University of Washington; Denscombe, Martyn. The Good Research Guide: For Small-Scale Social Research Projects . 5th edition. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press, 2014; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Groups of Research Methods

There are two main groups of research methods in the social sciences:

• The e mpirical-analytical group approaches the study of social sciences in a similar manner that researchers study the natural sciences . This type of research focuses on objective knowledge, research questions that can be answered yes or no, and operational definitions of variables to be measured. The empirical-analytical group employs deductive reasoning that uses existing theory as a foundation for formulating hypotheses that need to be tested. This approach is focused on explanation.
• The i nterpretative group of methods is focused on understanding phenomenon in a comprehensive, holistic way . Interpretive methods focus on analytically disclosing the meaning-making practices of human subjects [the why, how, or by what means people do what they do], while showing how those practices arrange so that it can be used to generate observable outcomes. Interpretive methods allow you to recognize your connection to the phenomena under investigation. However, the interpretative group requires careful examination of variables because it focuses more on subjective knowledge.

II.  Content

The introduction to your methodology section should begin by restating the research problem and underlying assumptions underpinning your study. This is followed by situating the methods you used to gather, analyze, and process information within the overall “tradition” of your field of study and within the particular research design you have chosen to study the problem. If the method you choose lies outside of the tradition of your field [i.e., your review of the literature demonstrates that the method is not commonly used], provide a justification for how your choice of methods specifically addresses the research problem in ways that have not been utilized in prior studies.

The remainder of your methodology section should describe the following:

• Decisions made in selecting the data you have analyzed or, in the case of qualitative research, the subjects and research setting you have examined,
• Tools and methods used to identify and collect information, and how you identified relevant variables,
• The ways in which you processed the data and the procedures you used to analyze that data, and
• The specific research tools or strategies that you utilized to study the underlying hypothesis and research questions.

In addition, an effectively written methodology section should:

• Introduce the overall methodological approach for investigating your research problem . Is your study qualitative or quantitative or a combination of both (mixed method)? Are you going to take a special approach, such as action research, or a more neutral stance?
• Indicate how the approach fits the overall research design . Your methods for gathering data should have a clear connection to your research problem. In other words, make sure that your methods will actually address the problem. One of the most common deficiencies found in research papers is that the proposed methodology is not suitable to achieving the stated objective of your paper.
• Describe the specific methods of data collection you are going to use , such as, surveys, interviews, questionnaires, observation, archival research. If you are analyzing existing data, such as a data set or archival documents, describe how it was originally created or gathered and by whom. Also be sure to explain how older data is still relevant to investigating the current research problem.
• Explain how you intend to analyze your results . Will you use statistical analysis? Will you use specific theoretical perspectives to help you analyze a text or explain observed behaviors? Describe how you plan to obtain an accurate assessment of relationships, patterns, trends, distributions, and possible contradictions found in the data.
• Provide background and a rationale for methodologies that are unfamiliar for your readers . Very often in the social sciences, research problems and the methods for investigating them require more explanation/rationale than widely accepted rules governing the natural and physical sciences. Be clear and concise in your explanation.
• Provide a justification for subject selection and sampling procedure . For instance, if you propose to conduct interviews, how do you intend to select the sample population? If you are analyzing texts, which texts have you chosen, and why? If you are using statistics, why is this set of data being used? If other data sources exist, explain why the data you chose is most appropriate to addressing the research problem.
• Provide a justification for case study selection . A common method of analyzing research problems in the social sciences is to analyze specific cases. These can be a person, place, event, phenomenon, or other type of subject of analysis that are either examined as a singular topic of in-depth investigation or multiple topics of investigation studied for the purpose of comparing or contrasting findings. In either method, you should explain why a case or cases were chosen and how they specifically relate to the research problem.
• Describe potential limitations . Are there any practical limitations that could affect your data collection? How will you attempt to control for potential confounding variables and errors? If your methodology may lead to problems you can anticipate, state this openly and show why pursuing this methodology outweighs the risk of these problems cropping up.

NOTE :   Once you have written all of the elements of the methods section, subsequent revisions should focus on how to present those elements as clearly and as logically as possibly. The description of how you prepared to study the research problem, how you gathered the data, and the protocol for analyzing the data should be organized chronologically. For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be presented, information should be presented in sub-sections according to topic. If necessary, consider using appendices for raw data.

ANOTHER NOTE : If you are conducting a qualitative analysis of a research problem , the methodology section generally requires a more elaborate description of the methods used as well as an explanation of the processes applied to gathering and analyzing of data than is generally required for studies using quantitative methods. Because you are the primary instrument for generating the data [e.g., through interviews or observations], the process for collecting that data has a significantly greater impact on producing the findings. Therefore, qualitative research requires a more detailed description of the methods used.

YET ANOTHER NOTE :   If your study involves interviews, observations, or other qualitative techniques involving human subjects , you may be required to obtain approval from the university's Office for the Protection of Research Subjects before beginning your research. This is not a common procedure for most undergraduate level student research assignments. However, i f your professor states you need approval, you must include a statement in your methods section that you received official endorsement and adequate informed consent from the office and that there was a clear assessment and minimization of risks to participants and to the university. This statement informs the reader that your study was conducted in an ethical and responsible manner. In some cases, the approval notice is included as an appendix to your paper.

III.  Problems to Avoid

Irrelevant Detail The methodology section of your paper should be thorough but concise. Do not provide any background information that does not directly help the reader understand why a particular method was chosen, how the data was gathered or obtained, and how the data was analyzed in relation to the research problem [note: analyzed, not interpreted! Save how you interpreted the findings for the discussion section]. With this in mind, the page length of your methods section will generally be less than any other section of your paper except the conclusion.

Unnecessary Explanation of Basic Procedures Remember that you are not writing a how-to guide about a particular method. You should make the assumption that readers possess a basic understanding of how to investigate the research problem on their own and, therefore, you do not have to go into great detail about specific methodological procedures. The focus should be on how you applied a method , not on the mechanics of doing a method. An exception to this rule is if you select an unconventional methodological approach; if this is the case, be sure to explain why this approach was chosen and how it enhances the overall process of discovery.

Problem Blindness It is almost a given that you will encounter problems when collecting or generating your data, or, gaps will exist in existing data or archival materials. Do not ignore these problems or pretend they did not occur. Often, documenting how you overcame obstacles can form an interesting part of the methodology. It demonstrates to the reader that you can provide a cogent rationale for the decisions you made to minimize the impact of any problems that arose.

Literature Review Just as the literature review section of your paper provides an overview of sources you have examined while researching a particular topic, the methodology section should cite any sources that informed your choice and application of a particular method [i.e., the choice of a survey should include any citations to the works you used to help construct the survey].

It’s More than Sources of Information! A description of a research study's method should not be confused with a description of the sources of information. Such a list of sources is useful in and of itself, especially if it is accompanied by an explanation about the selection and use of the sources. The description of the project's methodology complements a list of sources in that it sets forth the organization and interpretation of information emanating from those sources.

Azevedo, L.F. et al. "How to Write a Scientific Paper: Writing the Methods Section." Revista Portuguesa de Pneumologia 17 (2011): 232-238; Blair Lorrie. “Choosing a Methodology.” In Writing a Graduate Thesis or Dissertation , Teaching Writing Series. (Rotterdam: Sense Publishers 2016), pp. 49-72; Butin, Dan W. The Education Dissertation A Guide for Practitioner Scholars . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2010; Carter, Susan. Structuring Your Research Thesis . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012; Kallet, Richard H. “How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper.” Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004):1229-1232; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008. Methods Section. The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Rudestam, Kjell Erik and Rae R. Newton. “The Method Chapter: Describing Your Research Plan.” In Surviving Your Dissertation: A Comprehensive Guide to Content and Process . (Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, 2015), pp. 87-115; What is Interpretive Research. Institute of Public and International Affairs, University of Utah; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Methods and Materials. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College.

Writing Tip

Statistical Designs and Tests? Do Not Fear Them!

Don't avoid using a quantitative approach to analyzing your research problem just because you fear the idea of applying statistical designs and tests. A qualitative approach, such as conducting interviews or content analysis of archival texts, can yield exciting new insights about a research problem, but it should not be undertaken simply because you have a disdain for running a simple regression. A well designed quantitative research study can often be accomplished in very clear and direct ways, whereas, a similar study of a qualitative nature usually requires considerable time to analyze large volumes of data and a tremendous burden to create new paths for analysis where previously no path associated with your research problem had existed.

To locate data and statistics, GO HERE .

Another Writing Tip

Knowing the Relationship Between Theories and Methods

There can be multiple meaning associated with the term "theories" and the term "methods" in social sciences research. A helpful way to delineate between them is to understand "theories" as representing different ways of characterizing the social world when you research it and "methods" as representing different ways of generating and analyzing data about that social world. Framed in this way, all empirical social sciences research involves theories and methods, whether they are stated explicitly or not. However, while theories and methods are often related, it is important that, as a researcher, you deliberately separate them in order to avoid your theories playing a disproportionate role in shaping what outcomes your chosen methods produce.

Introspectively engage in an ongoing dialectic between the application of theories and methods to help enable you to use the outcomes from your methods to interrogate and develop new theories, or ways of framing conceptually the research problem. This is how scholarship grows and branches out into new intellectual territory.

Reynolds, R. Larry. Ways of Knowing. Alternative Microeconomics . Part 1, Chapter 3. Boise State University; The Theory-Method Relationship. S-Cool Revision. United Kingdom.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Methods and the Methodology

Do not confuse the terms "methods" and "methodology." As Schneider notes, a method refers to the technical steps taken to do research . Descriptions of methods usually include defining and stating why you have chosen specific techniques to investigate a research problem, followed by an outline of the procedures you used to systematically select, gather, and process the data [remember to always save the interpretation of data for the discussion section of your paper].

The methodology refers to a discussion of the underlying reasoning why particular methods were used . This discussion includes describing the theoretical concepts that inform the choice of methods to be applied, placing the choice of methods within the more general nature of academic work, and reviewing its relevance to examining the research problem. The methodology section also includes a thorough review of the methods other scholars have used to study the topic.

Bryman, Alan. "Of Methods and Methodology." Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal 3 (2008): 159-168; Schneider, Florian. “What's in a Methodology: The Difference between Method, Methodology, and Theory…and How to Get the Balance Right?” PoliticsEastAsia.com. Chinese Department, University of Leiden, Netherlands.

• << Previous: Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Next: Qualitative Methods >>
• Last Updated: Mar 26, 2024 10:40 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections
• How to Write Your Methods

Ensure understanding, reproducibility and replicability

What should you include in your methods section, and how much detail is appropriate?

Why Methods Matter

The methods section was once the most likely part of a paper to be unfairly abbreviated, overly summarized, or even relegated to hard-to-find sections of a publisher’s website. While some journals may responsibly include more detailed elements of methods in supplementary sections, the movement for increased reproducibility and rigor in science has reinstated the importance of the methods section. Methods are now viewed as a key element in establishing the credibility of the research being reported, alongside the open availability of data and results.

A clear methods section impacts editorial evaluation and readers’ understanding, and is also the backbone of transparency and replicability.

For example, the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology project set out in 2013 to replicate experiments from 50 high profile cancer papers, but revised their target to 18 papers once they understood how much methodological detail was not contained in the original papers.

What to include in your methods section

What you include in your methods sections depends on what field you are in and what experiments you are performing. However, the general principle in place at the majority of journals is summarized well by the guidelines at PLOS ONE : “The Materials and Methods section should provide enough detail to allow suitably skilled investigators to fully replicate your study. ” The emphases here are deliberate: the methods should enable readers to understand your paper, and replicate your study. However, there is no need to go into the level of detail that a lay-person would require—the focus is on the reader who is also trained in your field, with the suitable skills and knowledge to attempt a replication.

A constant principle of rigorous science

A methods section that enables other researchers to understand and replicate your results is a constant principle of rigorous, transparent, and Open Science. Aim to be thorough, even if a particular journal doesn’t require the same level of detail . Reproducibility is all of our responsibility. You cannot create any problems by exceeding a minimum standard of information. If a journal still has word-limits—either for the overall article or specific sections—and requires some methodological details to be in a supplemental section, that is OK as long as the extra details are searchable and findable .

Imagine replicating your own work, years in the future

As part of PLOS’ presentation on Reproducibility and Open Publishing (part of UCSF’s Reproducibility Series ) we recommend planning the level of detail in your methods section by imagining you are writing for your future self, replicating your own work. When you consider that you might be at a different institution, with different account logins, applications, resources, and access levels—you can help yourself imagine the level of specificity that you yourself would require to redo the exact experiment. Consider:

• Which details would you need to be reminded of? 
• Which cell line, or antibody, or software, or reagent did you use, and does it have a Research Resource ID (RRID) that you can cite?
• Which version of a questionnaire did you use in your survey? 
• Exactly which visual stimulus did you show participants, and is it publicly available? 
• What participants did you decide to exclude? 
• What process did you adjust, during your work? 

Tip: Be sure to capture any changes to your protocols

You yourself would want to know about any adjustments, if you ever replicate the work, so you can surmise that anyone else would want to as well. Even if a necessary adjustment you made was not ideal, transparency is the key to ensuring this is not regarded as an issue in the future. It is far better to transparently convey any non-optimal methods, or methodological constraints, than to conceal them, which could result in reproducibility or ethical issues downstream.

Visual aids for methods help when reading the whole paper

Consider whether a visual representation of your methods could be appropriate or aid understanding your process. A visual reference readers can easily return to, like a flow-diagram, decision-tree, or checklist, can help readers to better understand the complete article, not just the methods section.

Ethical Considerations

In addition to describing what you did, it is just as important to assure readers that you also followed all relevant ethical guidelines when conducting your research. While ethical standards and reporting guidelines are often presented in a separate section of a paper, ensure that your methods and protocols actually follow these guidelines. Read more about ethics .

Existing standards, checklists, guidelines, partners

While the level of detail contained in a methods section should be guided by the universal principles of rigorous science outlined above, various disciplines, fields, and projects have worked hard to design and develop consistent standards, guidelines, and tools to help with reporting all types of experiment. Below, you’ll find some of the key initiatives. Ensure you read the submission guidelines for the specific journal you are submitting to, in order to discover any further journal- or field-specific policies to follow, or initiatives/tools to utilize.

Tip: Keep your paper moving forward by providing the proper paperwork up front

Be sure to check the journal guidelines and provide the necessary documents with your manuscript submission. Collecting the necessary documentation can greatly slow the first round of peer review, or cause delays when you submit your revision.

Randomized Controlled Trials – CONSORT The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) project covers various initiatives intended to prevent the problems of  inadequate reporting of randomized controlled trials. The primary initiative is an evidence-based minimum set of recommendations for reporting randomized trials known as the CONSORT Statement . 

Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses – PRISMA The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses ( PRISMA ) is an evidence-based minimum set of items focusing  on the reporting of  reviews evaluating randomized trials and other types of research.

Research using Animals – ARRIVE The Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments ( ARRIVE ) guidelines encourage maximizing the information reported in research using animals thereby minimizing unnecessary studies. (Original study and proposal , and updated guidelines , in PLOS Biology .) 

Laboratory Protocols Protocols.io has developed a platform specifically for the sharing and updating of laboratory protocols , which are assigned their own DOI and can be linked from methods sections of papers to enhance reproducibility. Contextualize your protocol and improve discovery with an accompanying Lab Protocol article in PLOS ONE .

Consistent reporting of Materials, Design, and Analysis – the MDAR checklist A cross-publisher group of editors and experts have developed, tested, and rolled out a checklist to help establish and harmonize reporting standards in the Life Sciences . The checklist , which is available for use by authors to compile their methods, and editors/reviewers to check methods, establishes a minimum set of requirements in transparent reporting and is adaptable to any discipline within the Life Sciences, by covering a breadth of potentially relevant methodological items and considerations. If you are in the Life Sciences and writing up your methods section, try working through the MDAR checklist and see whether it helps you include all relevant details into your methods, and whether it reminded you of anything you might have missed otherwise.

Summary Writing tips

The main challenge you may find when writing your methods is keeping it readable AND covering all the details needed for reproducibility and replicability. While this is difficult, do not compromise on rigorous standards for credibility!

• Keep in mind future replicability, alongside understanding and readability.
• Follow checklists, and field- and journal-specific guidelines.
• Consider a commitment to rigorous and transparent science a personal responsibility, and not just adhering to journal guidelines.
• Establish whether there are persistent identifiers for any research resources you use that can be specifically cited in your methods section.
• Deposit your laboratory protocols in Protocols.io, establishing a permanent link to them. You can update your protocols later if you improve on them, as can future scientists who follow your protocols.
• Consider visual aids like flow-diagrams, lists, to help with reading other sections of the paper.
• Be specific about all decisions made during the experiments that someone reproducing your work would need to know.

Don’t

• Summarize or abbreviate methods without giving full details in a discoverable supplemental section.
• Presume you will always be able to remember how you performed the experiments, or have access to private or institutional notebooks and resources.
• Attempt to hide constraints or non-optimal decisions you had to make–transparency is the key to ensuring the credibility of your research.
• How to Write a Great Title
• How to Write an Abstract
• How to Report Statistics
• How to Write Discussions and Conclusions
• How to Edit Your Work

The contents of the Peer Review Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

The contents of the Writing Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher…

RES 6600: Research in Education: Methods Section

• Methods Section
• APA This link opens in a new window

Using Library Resources for Research: Methods Section

Start by familiarizing yourself with the "method" sections found in other pieces of research similar to your topic of choice.  two library databases are worth reviewing, both found on the library homepage., 1. the "find articles" box directs you to ebscohost databases, 2. the "find dissertations" box directs you to  proquest databases, you will then want to search using your " topic " and " the type of research method "  you are proposing i.e. qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods, action research. e.g.  teacher burnout and qualitative.

Video Tutorial Demonstrating How to Find Method Section examples  

Method Section Writing: "What, How, Which, & Why"

• Chapter 10: Writing a Research Proposal From textbook, Introduction to Educational Design by Craig Mertler
• Method Sections for Empirical Research Papers From James Madison University Library, this article provides a typical structure with guiding questions for completing a Methods section in a research paper.

Organizing your Social Sciences Research Paper/ The Methodology from University of Southern California Library

How to Write a Methods Section for a Research Pape r by A Research Guide

How to Write a Methods Section for a Psychology Paper: Tips and Examples of an APA Methods Section by verywellMind

How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper by Researcher.Life

APA Professional Sample Papers

Apa sample professional paper and microsoft word templates by research paper type.

• Professional sample paper with annotations  (features examples of APA conventions in an actual paper)
• Qualitative professional paper template
• Quantitative professional paper template
• Mixed methods professional paper template

Source: APA Style Sample Papers

Dr. Craig Mertler Books & Action Research Interview

Craig Mertler websit e

Library Materials

Check List for Methods Section

1. Read your assignment rubric: 

• Understand what you are being asked to provide to fulfill your assignment and respond to each section that will make up your grade.
• Include your research question & hypothesis on a separate page

2. Research Design Type:

• Describe the overall research design
• Justify why this design was chosen and how it aligns with the research objectives

3. Sampling Plan & Sample Description (Participants):

• Provide details about the participants or subjects involved in the study
• Mention relevant demographic information and discuss any inclusion/exclusion criteria used

4. Data Collection Tools/Instruments:

• Include materials or instruments used (e.g. surveys, questionnaires, equipment)

5. Procedures:

• Detail the steps to collect data or conduct research
• Provide chronological description of the research process

6. Reliability and validity: 

• Explain the reliability and validity of measurement instruments used
• Describe the procedures employed to ensure consistency and stability in measurements
• Describe how the research design and methodology support the validity of the study

6. Ethical Considerations

• Discuss any ethical issues related to the research and how they were addressed
• Include information about informed consent, confidentiality, and participant anonymity
• Provide details about institutional review board (IRB) if appropriate

7. APA Format:

• The APA citation style requires including the participants, materials, and procedures as an obligatory part. Remember to state demographic characteristics when working on the participants’ aspect. The main heading of the methods section should be written in bold and capitalized. Centering must be used. As for the methodology in research paper subheadings, they should be aligned to the left and done in bold.

Reference Librarian

• Next: APA >>
• Last Updated: Mar 28, 2024 2:01 PM
• URL: https://libguides.cuchicago.edu/RES_6600

Klinck Memorial Library

Concordia University Chicago 7400 Augusta Street River Forest, Illinois 60305 (708) 209-3050 [email protected] Campus Maps and Directions

• Staff Directory
• Getting Started
• Databases A-Z
• Library Catalog
• Interlibrary Loan

Popular Links

• Research Guides
• Research Help
• Request Class Instruction

© 2021 Copyright: Concordia University Chicago, Klinck Memorial Library

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Write a Methods Section for a Research Paper

A common piece of advice for authors preparing their first journal article for publication is to start with the methods section: just list everything that was done and go from there. While that might seem like a very practical approach to a first draft, if you do this without a clear outline and a story in mind, you can easily end up with journal manuscript sections that are not logically related to each other. 

Since the methods section constitutes the core of your paper, no matter when you write it, you need to use it to guide the reader carefully through your story from beginning to end without leaving questions unanswered. Missing or confusing details in this section will likely lead to early rejection of your manuscript or unnecessary back-and-forth with the reviewers until eventual publication. Here, you will find some useful tips on how to make your methods section the logical foundation of your research paper.

Not just a list of experiments and methods

While your introduction section provides the reader with the necessary background to understand your rationale and research question (and, depending on journal format and your personal preference, might already summarize the results), the methods section explains what exactly you did and how you did it. The point of this section is not to list all the boring details just for the sake of completeness. The purpose of the methods sections is to enable the reader to replicate exactly what you did, verify or corroborate your results, or maybe find that there are factors you did not consider or that are more relevant than expected. 

To make this section as easy to read as possible, you must clearly connect it to the information you provide in the introduction section before and the results section after, it needs to have a clear structure (chronologically or according to topics), and you need to present your results according to the same structure or topics later in the manuscript. There are also official guidelines and journal instructions to follow and ethical issues to avoid to ensure that your manuscript can quickly reach the publication stage.

Table of Contents:

• General Methods Structure: What is Your Story? 
• What Methods Should You Report (and Leave Out)? 
• Details Frequently Missing from the Methods Section

More Journal Guidelines to Consider 

• Accurate and Appropriate Language in the Methods

General Methods Section Structure: What Is Your Story? 

You might have conducted a number of experiments, maybe also a pilot before the main study to determine some specific factors or a follow-up experiment to clarify unclear details later in the process. Throwing all of these into your methods section, however, might not help the reader understand how everything is connected and how useful and appropriate your methodological approach is to investigate your specific research question. You therefore need to first come up with a clear outline and decide what to report and how to present that to the reader.

The first (and very important) decision to make is whether you present your experiments chronologically (e.g., Experiment 1, Experiment 2, Experiment 3… ), and guide the reader through every step of the process, or if you organize everything according to subtopics (e.g., Behavioral measures, Structural imaging markers, Functional imaging markers… ). In both cases, you need to use clear subheaders for the different subsections of your methods, and, very importantly, follow the same structure or focus on the same topics/measures in the results section so that the reader can easily follow along (see the two examples below).

If you are in doubt which way of organizing your experiments is better for your study, just ask yourself the following questions:

• Does the reader need to know the timeline of your study? 
• Is it relevant that one experiment was conducted first, because the outcome of this experiment determined the stimuli or factors that went into the next?
• Did the results of your first experiment leave important questions open that you addressed in an additional experiment (that was maybe not planned initially)?
• Is the answer to all of these questions “no”? Then organizing your methods section according to topics of interest might be the more logical choice.

If you think your timeline, protocol, or setup might be confusing or difficult for the reader to grasp, consider adding a graphic, flow diagram, decision tree, or table as a visual aid.

What Methods Should You Report (and Leave Out)?

The answer to this question is quite simple–you need to report everything that another researcher needs to know to be able to replicate your study. Just imagine yourself reading your methods section in the future and trying to set up the same experiments again without prior knowledge. You would probably need to ask questions such as:

• Where did you conduct your experiments (e.g., in what kind of room, under what lighting or temperature conditions, if those are relevant)? 
• What devices did you use? Are there specific settings to report?
• What specific software (and version of that software) did you use?
• How did you find and select your participants?
• How did you assign participants into groups?  
• Did you exclude participants from the analysis? Why and how?
• Where did your reagents or antibodies come from? Can you provide a Research Resource Identifier (RRID) ?
• Did you make your stimuli yourself or did you get them from somewhere?
• Are the stimuli you used available for other researchers?
• What kind of questionnaires did you use? Have they been validated?
• How did you analyze your data? What level of significance did you use?
• Were there any technical issues and did you have to adjust protocols?

Note that for every experimental detail you provide, you need to tell the reader (briefly) why you used this type of stimulus/this group of participants/these specific amounts of reagents. If there is earlier published research reporting the same methods, cite those studies. If you did pilot experiments to determine those details, describe the procedures and the outcomes of these experiments. If you made assumptions about the suitability of something based on the literature and common practice at your institution, then explain that to the reader.

In a nutshell, established methods need to be cited, and new methods need to be clearly described and briefly justified. However, if the fact that you use a new approach or a method that is not traditionally used for the data or phenomenon you study is one of the main points of your study (and maybe already reflected in the title of your article), then you need to explain your rationale for doing so in the introduction already and discuss it in more detail in the discussion section .

Note that you also need to explain your statistical analyses at the end of your methods section. You present the results of these analyses later, in the results section of your paper, but you need to show the reader in the methods section already that your approach is either well-established or valid, even if it is new or unusual. 

When it comes to the question of what details you should leave out, the answer is equally simple ‒ everything that you would not need to replicate your study in the future. If the educational background of your participants is listed in your institutional database but is not relevant to your study outcome, then don’t include that. Other things you should not include in the methods section:

• Background information that you already presented in the introduction section.
• In-depth comparisons of different methods ‒ these belong in the discussion section.
• Results, unless you summarize outcomes of pilot experiments that helped you determine factors for your main experiment.

Also, make sure your subheadings are as clear as possible, suit the structure you chose for your methods section, and are in line with the target journal guidelines. If you studied a disease intervention in human participants, then your methods section could look similar to this:

Since the main point of interest here are your patient-centered outcome variables, you would center your results section on these as well and choose your headers accordingly (e.g., Patient characteristics, Baseline evaluation, Outcome variable 1, Outcome variable 2, Drop-out rate ). 

If, instead, you did a series of visual experiments investigating the perception of faces including a pilot experiment to create the stimuli for your actual study, you would need to structure your methods section in a very different way, maybe like this:

Since here the analysis and outcome of the pilot experiment are already described in the methods section (as the basis for the main experimental setup and procedure), you do not have to mention it again in the results section. Instead, you could choose the two main experiments to structure your results section ( Discrimination and classification, Familiarization and adaptation ), or divide the results into all your test measures and/or potential interactions you described in the methods section (e.g., Discrimination performance, Classification performance, Adaptation aftereffects, Correlation analysis ).

Details Commonly Missing from the Methods Section

Manufacturer information.

For laboratory or technical equipment, you need to provide the model, name of the manufacturer, and company’s location. The usual format for these details is the product name (company name, city, state) for US-based manufacturers and the product name (company name, city/town, country) for companies outside the US.

Sample size and power estimation

Power and sample size estimations are measures for how many patients or participants are needed in a study in order to detect statistical significance and draw meaningful conclusions from the results. Outside of the medical field, studies are sometimes still conducted with a “the more the better” approach in mind, but since many journals now ask for those details, it is better to not skip this important step.

Ethical guidelines and approval

In addition to describing what you did, you also need to assure the editor and reviewers that your methods and protocols followed all relevant ethical standards and guidelines. This includes applying for approval at your local or national ethics committee, providing the name or location of that committee as well as the approval reference number you received, and, if you studied human participants, a statement that participants were informed about all relevant experimental details in advance and signed consent forms before the start of the study. For animal studies, you usually need to provide a statement that all procedures included in your research were in line with the Declaration of Helsinki. Make sure you check the target journal guidelines carefully, as these statements sometimes need to be placed at the end of the main article text rather than in the method section.

Structure & word limitations

While many journals simply follow the usual style guidelines (e.g., APA for the social sciences and psychology, AMA for medical research) and let you choose the headers of your method section according to your preferred structure and focus, some have precise guidelines and strict limitations, for example, on manuscript length and the maximum number of subsections or header levels. Make sure you read the instructions of your target journal carefully and restructure your method section if necessary before submission. If the journal does not give you enough space to include all the details that you deem necessary, then you can usually submit additional details as “supplemental” files and refer to those in the main text where necessary.

Standardized checklists

In addition to ethical guidelines and approval, journals also often ask you to submit one of the official standardized checklists for different study types to ensure all essential details are included in your manuscript. For example, there are checklists for randomized clinical trials, CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) , cohort, case-control, cross‐sectional studies, STROBE (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology ), diagnostic accuracy, STARD (STAndards for the Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy studies) , systematic reviews and meta‐analyses PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analyses) , and Case reports, CARE (CAse REport) .

Make sure you check if the manuscript uses a single- or double-blind review procedure , and delete all information that might allow a reviewer to guess where the authors are located from the manuscript text if necessary. This means that your method section cannot list the name and location of your institution, the names of researchers who conducted specific tests, or the name of your institutional ethics committee.  

Accurate and Appropriate Language in the Methods Section

Like all sections of your research paper, your method section needs to be written in an academic tone . That means it should be formal, vague expressions and colloquial language need to be avoided, and you need to correctly cite all your sources. If you describe human participants in your method section then you should be especially careful about your choice of words. For example, “participants” sounds more respectful than “subjects,” and patient-first language, that is, “patients with cancer,” is considered more appropriate than “cancer patients” by many journals.

Passive voice is often considered the standard for research papers, but it is completely fine to mix passive and active voice, even in the method section, to make your text as clear and concise as possible. Use the simple past tense to describe what you did, and the present tense when you refer to diagrams or tables. Have a look at this article if you need more general input on which verb tenses to use in a research paper . 

Lastly, make sure you label all the standard tests and questionnaires you use correctly (look up the original publication when in doubt) and spell genes and proteins according to the common databases for the species you studied, such as the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee database for human studies .  

Visit Wordvice AI’s AI Text Editor to receive a free grammar check and English editing services (including manuscript editing , paper editing , and dissertation editing ) before submitting your manuscript to journal editors.

• Translators
• Graphic Designers
• Editing Services
• Academic Editing Services
• Admissions Editing Services
• Admissions Essay Editing Services
• AI Content Editing Services
• APA Style Editing Services
• Application Essay Editing Services
• Book Editing Services
• Business Editing Services
• Capstone Paper Editing Services
• Children's Book Editing Services
• College Application Editing Services
• College Essay Editing Services
• Copy Editing Services
• Developmental Editing Services
• Dissertation Editing Services
• eBook Editing Services
• English Editing Services
• Horror Story Editing Services
• Legal Editing Services
• Line Editing Services
• Manuscript Editing Services
• MLA Style Editing Services
• Novel Editing Services
• Paper Editing Services
• Personal Statement Editing Services
• Research Paper Editing Services
• Résumé Editing Services
• Scientific Editing Services
• Short Story Editing Services
• Statement of Purpose Editing Services
• Substantive Editing Services
• Thesis Editing Services

Proofreading

• Proofreading Services
• Admissions Essay Proofreading Services
• Children's Book Proofreading Services
• Legal Proofreading Services
• Novel Proofreading Services
• Personal Statement Proofreading Services
• Research Proposal Proofreading Services
• Statement of Purpose Proofreading Services

Translation

• Translation Services

Graphic Design

• Graphic Design Services
• Dungeons & Dragons Design Services
• Sticker Design Services
• Writing Services

Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.

How to Master the Methods Section of Your Research Paper

The Methods section is a fundamental component of any research paper, playing a crucial role in establishing the validity and reliability of your study. It serves as a detailed roadmap of the research process that you undertook, providing sufficient information for the replication of the study. An effectively written Methods section can enhance the impact and credibility of your research, giving your readers a clear understanding of how your findings were achieved.

The methods section essentially answers the questions:

• What did you do?
• How did you do it?
• What tools and procedures did you use?
• And how did you analyze the data you collected?

Providing thorough responses to these questions, it typically includes detailed descriptions of your research design , participants or subjects of study, equipment or materials used, the procedures you followed, and the statistical methods applied for data analysis.

In the following sections, we'll delve into each of these elements, providing you with a comprehensive guide on how to craft a compelling, informative, and rigorous Methods section for your research paper.

Understanding the purpose of the methods section

Adding validity and credibility to the research.

The Methods section plays a pivotal role in adding validity and credibility to your research. By detailing the procedures you used, it allows readers to evaluate the soundness of your methodology. A well-written Methods section makes your research transparent, enabling others to understand exactly what you did and how you did it. This transparency not only adds to the credibility of your work but also allows for an accurate evaluation of the results. The Methods section is where you demonstrate that your research has been conducted in a rigorous, systematic, and ethical manner.

Enabling replication of the study

Perhaps one of the most crucial roles of the Methods section is to allow other researchers to replicate your study. Replication is a key aspect of scientific research - it's how we ensure that findings are not mere flukes or products of bias. By providing a clear and detailed description of your methodology, others can repeat your study under the same conditions to see if they achieve similar results. This not only reinforces the robustness of your own research but also contributes to the collective knowledge in your field. Consequently, the Methods section must be thorough and precise, ensuring that every step of your process can be duplicated accurately.

Deciding what to include in your methods section

Elements to include in the methods section.

The Methods section should provide a clear and comprehensive account of how you conducted your study. The content can vary depending on your field of study and the nature of your research, but typically, you should include the following elements:

• Participants: Describe who took part in your study. This might include details about their demographics (age, gender, etc.), how they were selected, and how they were assigned to groups in the case of experimental research.
• Materials and Equipment: Detail the materials or equipment you used during your study. This can range from lab equipment in a scientific study, surveys or tests in a social science study, to software and data sources in a computational study.
• Procedure: Give a step-by-step account of what you did during your study. This should be detailed enough to enable another researcher to replicate your study exactly.
• Data Analysis Methods: Explain how you analyzed your data. This might include statistical analysis methods, coding procedures for qualitative data , or computational algorithms.

Balancing detail and brevity

While it's important to provide enough detail in your Methods section to allow for replication, it's also crucial to avoid including unnecessary or irrelevant information. Striking a balance between detail and brevity is key. You should aim to provide a complete account of your methodology without getting lost in minute details that don't significantly impact the understanding or replication of your research.

Ask yourself, "Would including this detail enhance the understanding of my study or the ability to replicate it?" If the answer is no, you can likely leave that detail out. Remember, the goal is to provide a thorough, yet concise and readable account of your research methods .

Writing the participants section

Describing the participants.

In describing your participants, or subjects, it's essential to provide clear demographic information. This includes, but is not limited to, aspects like age, sex, ethnicity, occupation, education level, or any other characteristic relevant to your study. These details help provide context and allow readers to understand who your research is applicable to. For instance, a study involving only teenagers will have different implications than one involving adults.

Discussing selection and assignment to groups

The process of participant selection and assignment to groups is fundamental to many research studies, especially those involving experimental design. You should describe how you recruited your participants (e.g., through random sampling, convenience sampling, etc. ), and how they were assigned to different conditions or treatment groups if applicable. This might include a description of any randomization or matching procedures used. Clarity in this section bolsters the transparency and replicability of your study.

Ethical considerations in participant selection and treatment

It's also vital to discuss any ethical considerations related to your participants. This includes obtaining informed consent, ensuring participant privacy and confidentiality, and minimizing potential harm. If your study was reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee, mention this in your Methods section. It's also appropriate to detail any steps you took to minimize potential bias or discrimination in participant selection. This not only demonstrates your commitment to ethical research practices but also contributes to the credibility of your study.

Writing the materials and equipment section

Detailing materials and equipment used in the study.

When detailing the materials and equipment used in your study, it's important to be as specific and precise as possible. This might include the make and model of equipment, the type and source of materials, and even the versions of software packages used. These specifics enable replication and also allow other researchers to understand the tools that contributed to your findings. This part of the Methods section might vary significantly depending on your field of research. For example, a biology study might detail the type of microscopes used, whereas a psychology study could discuss specific psychometric tests.

Providing information about unique or unusually used tools

If you used special or unique tools, or if you used standard tools in an unusual way, this should be clearly specified in the Materials and Equipment section. Describe these tools or methods in detail, and explain why they were necessary for your study. If a tool is rare or specialized, consider providing a citation or source where readers can learn more about it. If a standard tool was used in a novel or unconventional way, explain what you did and why. This not only adds interest to your paper, but also contributes to the complete understanding and potential replication of your research. Remember, transparency is key in this section, as it helps enhance the credibility of your study and its findings.

Writing the procedure section

Importance of including each step taken during the study.

The Procedure section serves as a step-by-step guide to your study, detailing each phase from start to finish. The significance of this section cannot be overstated, as it offers a comprehensive look at the "how" of your research. Each step you took, every decision you made, and all procedures you followed should be recorded in this section. This level of detail not only supports your study's validity but also enables others to replicate your study accurately, fostering scientific transparency.

Tips for writing clearly and concisely, yet with enough detail for replication

When detailing your procedures, clarity and conciseness are key. Strive to describe your methods in a way that's straightforward and easy to follow. Avoid jargon where possible, and when it's unavoidable, make sure to provide clear definitions.

Remember, while conciseness is important, so too is the inclusion of sufficient detail to allow for replication. One approach to ensuring the right level of detail is to write as though you are explaining your study to another researcher in your field. They should be able to read your Procedure section and know exactly how to carry out your study.

Considerations for describing experimental and control conditions

If your study involved experimental and control conditions, these should be described with particular care. Detail the experimental procedures, clearly stating what distinguishes the experimental group from the control group. This includes any stimuli or treatments that were administered, as well as how, when, and where they were delivered. In addition, it's essential to articulate any measures that were taken to minimize the effects of confounding variables. This precise detailing underscores the reliability of your research and enhances the likelihood of accurate replication.

Writing the data analysis section

Describing the statistical or other methods used to analyze the data.

In the Data Analysis section, your aim should be to clearly describe the statistical or other methods you used to analyze your data. Include specifics about the tests used, the software employed, and the reasoning behind choosing these particular methods. For statistical tests, mention the test name, the variables it was used for, and any specific variations of the test that were applied. If you conducted qualitative analysis, explain the coding process, thematic analysis, or other methods used. Providing this level of detail allows other researchers to assess the appropriateness and rigor of your data analysis.

Importance of including all steps of the analysis, not just the final results

Remember that the Data Analysis section is not just about presenting the final results, but also about revealing the process you used to get there. Including each step of your analysis provides a complete picture of your research journey and ensures that your methodology can be accurately replicated and evaluated by others. Whether it involves data cleaning, variable coding, preliminary analyses, or specific sequences of statistical tests, all these details contribute to the overall transparency of your research.

Explaining any adjustments for potential biases or confounds

Lastly, be sure to explain any adjustments or corrections you made to account for potential biases or confounding variables in your data. This may include controlling for certain variables, dealing with missing data, or using specific statistical techniques to address these issues. Clearly articulating these adjustments enhances the reliability and validity of your findings, and also provides a more comprehensive understanding of your research approach. This is also where you can discuss the limitations of your study and how you accounted for them in your analysis.

Common mistakes and how to avoid them

Typical errors in the methods section.

One common mistake in writing the Methods section is providing too little detail. A lack of specificity can make it difficult for others to replicate your study or fully understand your process. On the other hand, including too much detail, particularly irrelevant information, can dilute the focus of your Methods section and confuse your readers.

Another common error is forgetting to include important steps, such as the processes for data cleaning, preprocessing, or certain aspects of participant recruitment and management. Also, failing to adequately discuss ethical considerations, when relevant, can negatively impact the perceived credibility of your research.

Tips and strategies for avoiding these mistakes

In order to effectively avoid common errors when writing the Methods section of your research paper, consider implementing the following strategies:

• Create a Detailed Outline: Begin by outlining your Methods section in detail. This will help you ensure that all important elements of your research process are captured and not forgotten in the final write-up.
• Strive for Balance: Aim for a balance between brevity and comprehensiveness. Remember, your primary objective is to provide enough information so that someone else can replicate your study.
• Review for Relevance: After drafting your section, review it to ensure that all included information is relevant and necessary. If certain details do not directly contribute to understanding your method or facilitating replication, consider removing them.
• Include Ethical Considerations: Ethics are a crucial aspect of any research. Therefore, remember to discuss any ethical considerations and approvals related to your study.
• Get Feedback: Have colleagues or mentors review your Methods section. They can offer valuable feedback and catch any errors or omissions you may have overlooked. It's always beneficial to have another pair of eyes on your work.

Sample methods sections and analysis

Consider the following examples of well-written methods sections from different fields of study. These fictional examples illustrate the important elements discussed above:

Psychology study example

In this study, 100 undergraduate students (50 males and 50 females, aged 18-25) were randomly selected from XYZ University. The selection criteria included full-time enrollment status and willingness to participate in the study. All participants provided informed consent prior to participation, and the study received ethical approval from the University's Institutional Review Board.

The instruments used included a demographic questionnaire, the Big Five Personality Test, and an academic performance survey. The demographic questionnaire gathered data on participants' age, gender, major, and year in college. The Big Five Personality Test, a validated and reliable instrument, was used to assess participants' personality traits. Academic performance was gauged through self-reported grade point averages (GPAs).

The experiment was conducted in a quiet and well-lit room. Participants first completed the demographic questionnaire, followed by the personality test. Afterward, they reported their GPAs on the academic performance survey. All responses were recorded anonymously to protect participant confidentiality.

The data were analyzed using SPSS software, version 24. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to assess the relationship between personality traits and academic performance.

Psychology study example analysis

The above example illustrates several good practices in writing a methods section.

• Clear description of participants: The researcher clearly stated the number, gender distribution, and age range of the participants, and also mentioned the selection criteria.
• Detailed information about materials: The researcher named the tests and surveys used and briefly described what they measure.
• Transparent procedure: The researcher provided a step-by-step guide to how the experiment was conducted, ensuring that it could be replicated by others.
• Explanation of data analysis: The researcher stated which software was used and what statistical tests were performed.

Environmental science study example

For this study, soil samples were collected from 10 different locations within the ABC National Park. The locations were chosen to represent a variety of habitats within the park, including grassland, wetland, and forest areas. The study was conducted in the spring season to ensure consistency in environmental conditions.

At each location, five soil samples were taken using a standard soil corer. The samples were taken from the top 10 cm of the soil, as this is where the majority of biological activity typically occurs. Each sample was immediately sealed in a sterile container to prevent contamination.

Back in the lab, the soil samples were analyzed for nutrient content and microbial diversity. Nutrient content, including levels of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, was measured using a soil nutrient testing kit from XYZ Company. Microbial diversity was assessed through DNA extraction and sequencing, using the DEF DNA extraction kit and the GHI sequencing platform.

The collected data were then analyzed using the JKL statistical software package. A one-way ANOVA was used to compare nutrient levels between the different habitats, while microbial diversity was evaluated using a diversity index.

In all cases, appropriate precautions were taken to minimize potential contamination and to ensure the accuracy of our measurements. This study was approved by the ABC National Park's Research Review Board.

Environmental science study example analysis

This example effectively demonstrates the correct structure and content for a methods section in environmental science.

• Clear explanation of sample collection: The researcher has detailed where, when, and how the soil samples were collected.
• Transparent process of sample analysis: The specific procedures and equipment used for analyzing the samples are clearly outlined, providing potential for replication.
• Methodical data analysis: The use of specific software and statistical tests is mentioned, providing clarity on how results were derived.

Linguistics study example

For this study, the use of passive voice in academic writing across disciplines was investigated. A corpus of 500 peer-reviewed journal articles was created, comprising 100 articles from each of the following disciplines: Social Sciences, Humanities, Natural Sciences, Applied Sciences, and Formal Sciences. Articles were selected randomly from journals indexed in the ABC Database from the year 2022.

The data collection tool was a script written in Python, utilizing the Natural Language Toolkit (NLTK) for text processing and analysis. The script identified and counted instances of passive voice in each article.

The articles were processed one by one, first being converted into plain text files to allow for easy processing. The Python script then ran on each text file, analyzing and storing the data on passive voice usage. This process was automated to minimize errors and ensure consistency.

For data analysis, the counts of passive voice instances were normalized by the total word count of each article to account for variations in article length. The differences in passive voice usage across disciplines were then statistically analyzed using a Chi-square test in the R software environment.

All procedures in this study were designed with consideration to copyright and fair use policies. The Python script used for this study is openly available for other researchers to use and modify.

Linguistics study example analysis

This example demonstrates effective writing of a methods section in a Linguistics study.

• Detailed description of the corpus: The researcher clearly defined the source and composition of the corpus, including the number of texts and their disciplinary distribution.
• Explanation of data collection tool and process: The researcher explained the software and process used for text analysis, providing enough detail for replication.
• Transparent data analysis: The researcher mentioned how they accounted for variations in article length and which statistical test was used for analysis.

Remember, although methods sections will differ across disciplines, they all should provide a clear, concise, and replicable roadmap of the research process.

The methods section of a research paper is a critical component that adds credibility to your research and allows others to replicate and verify your study. It involves providing detailed descriptions of the participants, materials and equipment used, the procedures followed, and the methods of data analysis.

While the exact content may vary depending on your research design and field of study, a well-crafted methods section will always focus on clarity, comprehensiveness, and transparency. The examples provided in this post illustrate good practices in diverse fields and can serve as a guide for you to construct your own.

Avoid common errors by creating a detailed outline, striving for balance in information, reviewing for relevance, including ethical considerations, and getting feedback from colleagues or mentors.

With these steps, you'll be well on your way to writing a high-quality methods section that bolsters your research paper's integrity and contributes meaningfully to your field.

Header image by Cytonn Photography .

Related Posts

Top 10 Ph.D. Viva Questions and How to Answer Them

Making Academic Writing More Digestible

• Academic Writing Advice
• All Blog Posts
• Writing Advice
• Admissions Writing Advice
• Book Writing Advice
• Short Story Advice
• Employment Writing Advice
• Business Writing Advice
• Web Content Advice
• Article Writing Advice
• Magazine Writing Advice
• Grammar Advice
• Dialect Advice
• Editing Advice
• Freelance Advice
• Legal Writing Advice
• Poetry Advice
• Graphic Design Advice
• Logo Design Advice
• Translation Advice
• Blog Reviews
• Short Story Award Winners
• Scholarship Winners

Elevate your research paper with expert editing services

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » Research Methodology – Types, Examples and writing Guide

Research Methodology – Types, Examples and writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Methodology

Definition:

Research Methodology refers to the systematic and scientific approach used to conduct research, investigate problems, and gather data and information for a specific purpose. It involves the techniques and procedures used to identify, collect , analyze , and interpret data to answer research questions or solve research problems . Moreover, They are philosophical and theoretical frameworks that guide the research process.

Structure of Research Methodology

Research methodology formats can vary depending on the specific requirements of the research project, but the following is a basic example of a structure for a research methodology section:

I. Introduction

• Provide an overview of the research problem and the need for a research methodology section
• Outline the main research questions and objectives

II. Research Design

• Explain the research design chosen and why it is appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Discuss any alternative research designs considered and why they were not chosen
• Describe the research setting and participants (if applicable)

III. Data Collection Methods

• Describe the methods used to collect data (e.g., surveys, interviews, observations)
• Explain how the data collection methods were chosen and why they are appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Detail any procedures or instruments used for data collection

IV. Data Analysis Methods

• Describe the methods used to analyze the data (e.g., statistical analysis, content analysis )
• Explain how the data analysis methods were chosen and why they are appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Detail any procedures or software used for data analysis

V. Ethical Considerations

• Discuss any ethical issues that may arise from the research and how they were addressed
• Explain how informed consent was obtained (if applicable)
• Detail any measures taken to ensure confidentiality and anonymity

VI. Limitations

• Identify any potential limitations of the research methodology and how they may impact the results and conclusions

VII. Conclusion

• Summarize the key aspects of the research methodology section
• Explain how the research methodology addresses the research question(s) and objectives

Research Methodology Types

Types of Research Methodology are as follows:

Quantitative Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection and analysis of numerical data using statistical methods. This type of research is often used to study cause-and-effect relationships and to make predictions.

Qualitative Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection and analysis of non-numerical data such as words, images, and observations. This type of research is often used to explore complex phenomena, to gain an in-depth understanding of a particular topic, and to generate hypotheses.

Mixed-Methods Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that combines elements of both quantitative and qualitative research. This approach can be particularly useful for studies that aim to explore complex phenomena and to provide a more comprehensive understanding of a particular topic.

Case Study Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves in-depth examination of a single case or a small number of cases. Case studies are often used in psychology, sociology, and anthropology to gain a detailed understanding of a particular individual or group.

Action Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves a collaborative process between researchers and practitioners to identify and solve real-world problems. Action research is often used in education, healthcare, and social work.

Experimental Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the manipulation of one or more independent variables to observe their effects on a dependent variable. Experimental research is often used to study cause-and-effect relationships and to make predictions.

Survey Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection of data from a sample of individuals using questionnaires or interviews. Survey research is often used to study attitudes, opinions, and behaviors.

Grounded Theory Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the development of theories based on the data collected during the research process. Grounded theory is often used in sociology and anthropology to generate theories about social phenomena.

Research Methodology Example

An Example of Research Methodology could be the following:

Research Methodology for Investigating the Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Reducing Symptoms of Depression in Adults

Introduction:

The aim of this research is to investigate the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) in reducing symptoms of depression in adults. To achieve this objective, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted using a mixed-methods approach.

Research Design:

The study will follow a pre-test and post-test design with two groups: an experimental group receiving CBT and a control group receiving no intervention. The study will also include a qualitative component, in which semi-structured interviews will be conducted with a subset of participants to explore their experiences of receiving CBT.

Participants:

Participants will be recruited from community mental health clinics in the local area. The sample will consist of 100 adults aged 18-65 years old who meet the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the experimental group or the control group.

Intervention :

The experimental group will receive 12 weekly sessions of CBT, each lasting 60 minutes. The intervention will be delivered by licensed mental health professionals who have been trained in CBT. The control group will receive no intervention during the study period.

Data Collection:

Quantitative data will be collected through the use of standardized measures such as the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7). Data will be collected at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at a 3-month follow-up. Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with a subset of participants from the experimental group. The interviews will be conducted at the end of the intervention period, and will explore participants’ experiences of receiving CBT.

Data Analysis:

Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-tests, and mixed-model analyses of variance (ANOVA) to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. Qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic analysis to identify common themes and patterns in participants’ experiences of receiving CBT.

Ethical Considerations:

This study will comply with ethical guidelines for research involving human subjects. Participants will provide informed consent before participating in the study, and their privacy and confidentiality will be protected throughout the study. Any adverse events or reactions will be reported and managed appropriately.

Data Management:

All data collected will be kept confidential and stored securely using password-protected databases. Identifying information will be removed from qualitative data transcripts to ensure participants’ anonymity.

Limitations:

One potential limitation of this study is that it only focuses on one type of psychotherapy, CBT, and may not generalize to other types of therapy or interventions. Another limitation is that the study will only include participants from community mental health clinics, which may not be representative of the general population.

Conclusion:

This research aims to investigate the effectiveness of CBT in reducing symptoms of depression in adults. By using a randomized controlled trial and a mixed-methods approach, the study will provide valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying the relationship between CBT and depression. The results of this study will have important implications for the development of effective treatments for depression in clinical settings.

How to Write Research Methodology

Writing a research methodology involves explaining the methods and techniques you used to conduct research, collect data, and analyze results. It’s an essential section of any research paper or thesis, as it helps readers understand the validity and reliability of your findings. Here are the steps to write a research methodology:

• Start by explaining your research question: Begin the methodology section by restating your research question and explaining why it’s important. This helps readers understand the purpose of your research and the rationale behind your methods.
• Describe your research design: Explain the overall approach you used to conduct research. This could be a qualitative or quantitative research design, experimental or non-experimental, case study or survey, etc. Discuss the advantages and limitations of the chosen design.
• Discuss your sample: Describe the participants or subjects you included in your study. Include details such as their demographics, sampling method, sample size, and any exclusion criteria used.
• Describe your data collection methods : Explain how you collected data from your participants. This could include surveys, interviews, observations, questionnaires, or experiments. Include details on how you obtained informed consent, how you administered the tools, and how you minimized the risk of bias.
• Explain your data analysis techniques: Describe the methods you used to analyze the data you collected. This could include statistical analysis, content analysis, thematic analysis, or discourse analysis. Explain how you dealt with missing data, outliers, and any other issues that arose during the analysis.
• Discuss the validity and reliability of your research : Explain how you ensured the validity and reliability of your study. This could include measures such as triangulation, member checking, peer review, or inter-coder reliability.
• Acknowledge any limitations of your research: Discuss any limitations of your study, including any potential threats to validity or generalizability. This helps readers understand the scope of your findings and how they might apply to other contexts.
• Provide a summary: End the methodology section by summarizing the methods and techniques you used to conduct your research. This provides a clear overview of your research methodology and helps readers understand the process you followed to arrive at your findings.

When to Write Research Methodology

Research methodology is typically written after the research proposal has been approved and before the actual research is conducted. It should be written prior to data collection and analysis, as it provides a clear roadmap for the research project.

The research methodology is an important section of any research paper or thesis, as it describes the methods and procedures that will be used to conduct the research. It should include details about the research design, data collection methods, data analysis techniques, and any ethical considerations.

The methodology should be written in a clear and concise manner, and it should be based on established research practices and standards. It is important to provide enough detail so that the reader can understand how the research was conducted and evaluate the validity of the results.

Applications of Research Methodology

Here are some of the applications of research methodology:

• To identify the research problem: Research methodology is used to identify the research problem, which is the first step in conducting any research.
• To design the research: Research methodology helps in designing the research by selecting the appropriate research method, research design, and sampling technique.
• To collect data: Research methodology provides a systematic approach to collect data from primary and secondary sources.
• To analyze data: Research methodology helps in analyzing the collected data using various statistical and non-statistical techniques.
• To test hypotheses: Research methodology provides a framework for testing hypotheses and drawing conclusions based on the analysis of data.
• To generalize findings: Research methodology helps in generalizing the findings of the research to the target population.
• To develop theories : Research methodology is used to develop new theories and modify existing theories based on the findings of the research.
• To evaluate programs and policies : Research methodology is used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and policies by collecting data and analyzing it.
• To improve decision-making: Research methodology helps in making informed decisions by providing reliable and valid data.

Purpose of Research Methodology

Research methodology serves several important purposes, including:

• To guide the research process: Research methodology provides a systematic framework for conducting research. It helps researchers to plan their research, define their research questions, and select appropriate methods and techniques for collecting and analyzing data.
• To ensure research quality: Research methodology helps researchers to ensure that their research is rigorous, reliable, and valid. It provides guidelines for minimizing bias and error in data collection and analysis, and for ensuring that research findings are accurate and trustworthy.
• To replicate research: Research methodology provides a clear and detailed account of the research process, making it possible for other researchers to replicate the study and verify its findings.
• To advance knowledge: Research methodology enables researchers to generate new knowledge and to contribute to the body of knowledge in their field. It provides a means for testing hypotheses, exploring new ideas, and discovering new insights.
• To inform decision-making: Research methodology provides evidence-based information that can inform policy and decision-making in a variety of fields, including medicine, public health, education, and business.

Advantages of Research Methodology

Research methodology has several advantages that make it a valuable tool for conducting research in various fields. Here are some of the key advantages of research methodology:

• Systematic and structured approach : Research methodology provides a systematic and structured approach to conducting research, which ensures that the research is conducted in a rigorous and comprehensive manner.
• Objectivity : Research methodology aims to ensure objectivity in the research process, which means that the research findings are based on evidence and not influenced by personal bias or subjective opinions.
• Replicability : Research methodology ensures that research can be replicated by other researchers, which is essential for validating research findings and ensuring their accuracy.
• Reliability : Research methodology aims to ensure that the research findings are reliable, which means that they are consistent and can be depended upon.
• Validity : Research methodology ensures that the research findings are valid, which means that they accurately reflect the research question or hypothesis being tested.
• Efficiency : Research methodology provides a structured and efficient way of conducting research, which helps to save time and resources.
• Flexibility : Research methodology allows researchers to choose the most appropriate research methods and techniques based on the research question, data availability, and other relevant factors.
• Scope for innovation: Research methodology provides scope for innovation and creativity in designing research studies and developing new research techniques.

Research Methodology Vs Research Methods

About the author.

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

How to Write the Methods Section of a Scientific Article

What Is the Methods Section of a Research Paper?

The Methods section of a research article includes an explanation of the procedures used to conduct the experiment. For authors of scientific research papers, the objective is to present their findings clearly and concisely and to provide enough information so that the experiment can be duplicated.

Research articles contain very specific sections, usually dictated by either the target journal or specific style guides. For example, in the social and behavioral sciences, the American Psychological Association (APA) style guide is used to gather information on how the manuscript should be arranged . As with most styles, APA’s objectives are to ensure that manuscripts are written with minimum distractions to the reader. Every research article should include a detailed Methods section after the Introduction.

Why is the Methods Section Important?

The Methods section (also referred to as “Materials and Methods”) is important because it provides the reader enough information to judge whether the study is valid and reproducible.

Structure of the Methods Section in a Research Paper

While designing a research study, authors typically decide on the key points that they’re trying to prove or the “ cause-and-effect relationship ” between objects of the study. Very simply, the study is designed to meet the objective. According to APA, a Methods section comprises of the following three subsections: participants, apparatus, and procedure.

How do You Write a Method Section in Biology?

In biological sciences, the Methods section might be more detailed, but the objectives are the same—to present the study clearly and concisely so that it is understandable and can be duplicated.

If animals (including human subjects) were used in the study, authors should ensure to include statements that they were treated according to the protocols outlined to ensure that treatment is as humane as possible.

• The Declaration of Helsinki is a set of ethical principles developed by The World Medical Association to provide guidance to scientists and physicians in medical research involving human subjects.

Research conducted at an institution using human participants is overseen by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) with which it is affiliated. IRB is an administrative body whose purpose is to protect the rights and welfare of human subjects during their participation in the study.

Literature Search

Literature searches are performed to gather as much information as relevant from previous studies. They are important for providing evidence on the topic and help validate the research. Most are accomplished using keywords or phrases to search relevant databases. For example, both MEDLINE and PubMed provide information on biomedical literature. Google Scholar, according to APA, is “one of the best sources available to an individual beginning a literature search.” APA also suggests using PsycINFO and refers to it as “the premier database for locating articles in psychological science and related literature.”

Authors must make sure to have a set of keywords (usually taken from the objective statement) to stay focused and to avoid having the search move far from the original objective. Authors will benefit by setting limiting parameters, such as date ranges, and avoiding getting pulled into the trap of using non-valid resources, such as social media, conversations with people in the same discipline, or similar non-valid sources, as references.

Related: Ready with your methods section and looking forward to manuscript submission ? Check these journal selection guidelines now!

What Should be Included in the Methods Section of a Research Paper?

One commonly misused term in research papers is “methodology.” Methodology refers to a branch of the Philosophy of Science which deals with scientific methods, not to the methods themselves, so authors should avoid using it. Here is the list of main subsections that should be included in the Methods section of a research paper ; authors might use subheadings more clearly to describe their research.

• Literature search : Authors should cite any sources that helped with their choice of methods. Authors should indicate timeframes of past studies and their particular parameters.
• Study participants : Authors should cite the source from where they received any non-human subjects. The number of animals used, the ages, sex, their initial conditions, and how they were housed and cared for, should be listed. In case of human subjects, authors should provide the characteristics, such as geographical location; their age ranges, sex, and medical history (if relevant); and the number of subjects. In case hospital records were used, authors should include the subjects’ basic health information and vital statistics at the beginning of the study. Authors should also state that written informed consent was provided by each subject.
• Inclusion/exclusion criteria : Authors should describe their inclusion and exclusion criteria, how they were determined, and how many subjects were eliminated.
• Group characteristics (could be combined with “Study participants”) : Authors should describe how the chosen group was divided into subgroups and their characteristics, including the control. Authors should also describe any specific equipment used, such as housing needs and feed (usually for animal studies). If patient records are reviewed and assessed, authors should mention whether the reviewers were blinded to them.
• Procedures : Authors should describe their study design. Any necessary preparations (e.g., tissue samples, drugs) and instruments must be explained. Authors should describe how the subjects were “ manipulated to answer the experimental question .” Timeframes should be included to ensure that the procedures are clear (e.g., “Rats were given XX drug for 14 d”). For animals sacrificed, the methods used and the protocols followed should be outlined.
• Statistical analyses: The type of data, how they were measured, and which statistical tests were performed, should be described. (Note: This is not the “results” section; any relevant tables and figures should be referenced later.) Specific software used must be cited.

What Should not be Included in Your Methods Section?

Common pitfalls can make the manuscript cumbersome to read or might make the readers question the validity of the research. The University of Southern California provides some guidelines .

• Background information that is not helpful must be avoided.
• Authors must avoid providing a lot of detail.
• Authors should focus more on how their method was used to meet their objective and less on mechanics .
• Any obstacles faced and how they were overcome should be described (often in your “Study Limitations”). This will help validate the results.

According to the University of Richmond , authors must avoid including extensive details or an exhaustive list of equipment that have been used as readers could quickly lose attention. These unnecessary details add nothing to validate the research and do not help the reader understand how the objective was satisfied. A well-thought-out Methods section is one of the most important parts of the manuscript. Authors must make a note to always prepare a draft that lists all parts, allow others to review it, and revise it to remove any superfluous information.

m so confused about ma research but now m okay so thank uh so mxh

Mil gracias por su ayuda.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• AI in Academia
• Infographic
• Manuscripts & Grants
• Reporting Research
• Trending Now

Can AI Tools Prepare a Research Manuscript From Scratch? — A comprehensive guide

As technology continues to advance, the question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) tools can prepare…

Abstract Vs. Introduction — Do you know the difference?

Ross wants to publish his research. Feeling positive about his research outcomes, he begins to…

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

Demystifying Research Methodology With Field Experts

Choosing research methodology Research design and methodology Evidence-based research approach How RAxter can assist researchers

• Manuscript Preparation
• Publishing Research

How to Choose Best Research Methodology for Your Study

Successful research conduction requires proper planning and execution. While there are multiple reasons and aspects…

Top 5 Key Differences Between Methods and Methodology

While burning the midnight oil during literature review, most researchers do not realize that the…

How to Draft the Acknowledgment Section of a Manuscript

Discussion Vs. Conclusion: Know the Difference Before Drafting Manuscripts

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

How to write the methods section of a research paper

Affiliation.

• 1 Respiratory Care Services, San Francisco General Hospital, NH:GA-2, 1001 Potrero Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94110, USA. [email protected]
• PMID: 15447808

The methods section of a research paper provides the information by which a study's validity is judged. Therefore, it requires a clear and precise description of how an experiment was done, and the rationale for why specific experimental procedures were chosen. The methods section should describe what was done to answer the research question, describe how it was done, justify the experimental design, and explain how the results were analyzed. Scientific writing is direct and orderly. Therefore, the methods section structure should: describe the materials used in the study, explain how the materials were prepared for the study, describe the research protocol, explain how measurements were made and what calculations were performed, and state which statistical tests were done to analyze the data. Once all elements of the methods section are written, subsequent drafts should focus on how to present those elements as clearly and logically as possibly. The description of preparations, measurements, and the protocol should be organized chronologically. For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be presented, information should be presented in sub-sections according to topic. Material in each section should be organized by topic from most to least important.

• Biomedical Research*
• Research Design
• Writing* / standards

• Advanced search

Advanced Search

How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Manuscript

• Find this author on Google Scholar
• Find this author on PubMed
• Search for this author on this site
• For correspondence: [email protected]
• Figures & Data
• Info & Metrics

The methods section of a manuscript is one of the most important parts of a research paper because it provides information on the validity of the study and credibility of the results. Inadequate description of the methods has been reported as one of the main reasons for manuscript rejection. The methods section must include sufficient detail so that others could repeat the study and reproduce the results. The structure of the methods section should flow logically and chronologically. There are multiple components of methods sections, including study design, materials used, study procedures, and data analysis. Each element must be adequately described and thoroughly detailed to provide an understanding of how the results were obtained and how to interpret the findings. Studies that involved humans or animals must include an ethics statement of approval from the appropriate governing body. The methods section should explain how subjects were identified and should state inclusion and exclusion criteria. All materials used to complete the study should be described in detail, including equipment, drugs, gases, chemicals, treatments, interventions, or other items. Study procedures should outline all steps taken to obtain the results and clearly state the outcome measures. Subheadings might be helpful for organizing the methods section into subsections when there is a considerable amount of information to report. A well-written methods section will guide the reader through the research process and provide adequate information to evaluate study validity and reproduce the work. The purpose of this paper is to provide guidance for writing the methods section of a manuscript.

• research paper
• science writing
• publication
• study protocol
• Introduction

Dissemination of research findings occurs through abstracts, posters, presentations, and manuscripts. 1 , - , 3 Writing the manuscript is considered the last step of the research process because it provides a detailed account of the research from start to finish. 4 , 5 The main components of a research paper include an abstract, the introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions. 3 , 4 Each section of the manuscript is important and has a specific role in describing the research story. However, the methods are one of the most critical sections of a manuscript because the details are used to evaluate and determine the validity of the study and credibility of the results. 6 Validity in research refers to reliability of the measured results: the extent to which the study accurately measured what it intended (internal validity) and how the results can be applied to the general population beyond the study (external validity). 6 , 7

The methods section describes what was done to answer the research question. 8 This section specifies how the research was done, the rationale for the procedures, what materials were used, and how the results were analyzed, all in a clear, concise, and organized manner. 6 The description of the research should provide enough detail so others could repeat the study and reproduce the results. 6 , 9 , 10 Much of the methods section should be written before the study is initiated. Indeed, for funded research, a detailed methods section is written as part of the grant application. There are several aspects of the methods sections, and the essential elements will vary, depending on the type of study. Submission requirements differ among journals; therefore, it is important to consult the instructions for authors for the specific journal to ensure that all necessary elements are included. 11 The purpose of this paper is to describe the different components of the methods section and provide guidance for writing the methods section of a research paper.

• General Considerations

An inadequate description of methods has been identified as one of the top reasons for manuscript rejection. 12 It has been suggested that including too much information is better than having insufficient detail because irrelevant content can later be omitted. 12 The methods section of a research paper is analogous to a recipe. 10 , 13 A recipe is composed of multiple elements, including the list and quantity of ingredients, equipment and tools needed and applicable settings, and the detailed instructions for how to create the recipe. Similar to a recipe, there are different elements of methods to describe in a manuscript. In general, common components of the methods section include a description of the study design, materials used, study procedures, measurements or calculations, and the statistical tests used to analyze the results. Materials used to conduct research are comparable with the ingredients, tools, and equipment for a recipe. Materials represent what was studied, including subjects, equipment or devices, and treatments or interventions. 6 , 14 The steps to create a recipe are akin to study procedures such as the process for data collection, measurements, calculations, and statistical analysis. A summary of the different elements of the methods section is included in Table 1 . The individual components for each element may vary, depending on the nature of the study.

• View inline
• Download powerpoint

Methods Section Elements

Although similarities exist between a recipe and the methods section of a research paper, the methods section should not be formatted to read like a recipe. 13 Use past tense for writing the methods section because the study has been completed and describes what was already done. 6 , 9 , 10 , 13 , 14 The methods section should be structured for logical and chronological flow. 6 , 14 , 15 Use of subheadings can be helpful for organizing the different components for the methods section when there is a substantial amount of detail to describe. 6 , 13 However, subheadings may not be required by some journals. An excessive use of subheadings can be distracting to the reader by interrupting the flow of the manuscript. There should not be a subheading for every paragraph. This is particularly distracting when each subheading is followed by a short 1- or 2-sentence paragraph. Paragraphs with fewer than 3 sentences should be avoided; combine the information with another paragraph unless the journal to which the paper will be submitted requires specific subheadings. Subheadings can be useful as an outline when writing the methods section but then might be omitted in the final manuscript.

A common error in manuscript writing is reporting results in the methods section and vice versa. A frequently occurring example is including the number of subjects who participated in the research in the methods section when it was unknown how many met inclusion criteria before study initiation and subject screening. The methods section should only include information available during the planning phase, before study initiation. 10 , 16 There are instances in which study procedures may have changed after the study commencement. This information would be reported in the methods section but the outcomes stated in the results section. The results section should reflect the data obtained from study procedures because this information would be unknown before the study was completed.

• Study Design

The methods section often begins with an overall description of the study design and key attributes, including the type of study, setting, time frame, and procedures. 14 , 15 This provides an overview and context for how the study was conducted with further details and specifics described in subsequent subsections. Study design has been described as a road map for the methods section to provide information for how to understand the approach and interpret the results. 14

Common study designs include observational, bench evaluation, systematic review, randomized controlled trial, survey, and others. Guidelines for writing the manuscript include the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist for randomized controlled trials and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews. 17 , 18 Registration is another consideration for clinical trials and systematic reviews. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) 16 requires registration of clinical trials on a public trials registry. Many journals, including R espiratory C are , follow the recommendations for publication set forth by this group. A randomized controlled trial should also include the blinding mechanism and different treatment groups as applicable. 17 Although registration of a systematic review is often not a prerequisite for publication, registering the protocol supports transparency, decreases potential bias, and can help prevent duplication of reviews. 18 An observational study should report if the design was retrospective, prospective, a secondary or post hoc analysis, or other category of observational design. 7

The setting where the study occurred, if it included data from a single-center or multiple centers, and the time frame in which it took place must be included because these factors have implications for clinical practice, generalizability, and validity. 7 Potential study settings might include an ICU (or specific ICU type), medical surgical ward, emergency department, out-patient clinic, home-care environment, or simulation laboratory. The time frame is an essential element for context because practices and trends change over time. A prime example of this is prone positioning for treatment of hypoxemic respiratory failure as use substantially increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. 19

• Ethics Statement

The United States Department of Health and Human Services defines a human subject “as a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research obtains information or biospecimens through intervention or interaction with the individual, and uses, studies, or analyzes the biospecimens; or obtains, uses, studies, analyzes, or generates identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens.” 20 The methods section must include a statement regarding approval from an institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee for research that included human subjects. 16 Quality improvement studies and certain types of surveys are often not considered human subject research and therefore may not require IRB oversight but the decision is made by the IRB. Quality improvement projects, depending on requirements of the institution or organization, can be performed without IRB approval in some cases; however, IRB approval is needed before publication or presentation outside of the institution, and human subject determination is made by the IRB, not the investigators.

Animal studies also require ethics approval to be reported in the methods section. Research that involves animals is subject to approval from the local Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and must be conducted in accordance with national guidelines, for example, the National Institute of Health Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. 21 For journals that do not have a specific requirement for where to include the ethics statement within the methods section, many authors typically incorporate it in the initial general description of the study or with the detailed description of the subjects. Some studies have included it at the beginning of the methods section.

Characteristics of the study population should be described. This includes basic demographics (eg, adults or children, age, sex) and general health status such as if the individuals were healthy volunteers or had a specific diagnosis or condition. This information is also needed for control groups. 4 Inclusion criteria for how subjects were identified and selected should be detailed as well as reasons for exclusion. For example, an evaluation of a disease management program included adults ages ≥ 65 years and with COPD who were admitted to 1 of 5 hospitals during a specified time frame. 22 Patients were excluded if they left against medical advice, died during admission, transferred to a hospital outside of the health system, entered hospice care, refused home care, or were unable to participate in education. 22 In this example, subject characteristics (adults with COPD), selection and identification (hospital admission during defined time frame), and exclusion criteria are clearly stated.

When referring to human subjects in research, the terms subject and patient are often used interchangeably, but there is a difference. 23 A patient receives care to improve health, and care is individualized in each particular case. When a patient participates in research, he or she becomes a subject. In research, care is designed to create information and is the same for all subjects based on the study protocol. The individual conducting the research is not always involved in the patient care provided, thus also making the distinction between subject and patient. A common error is to use the word subjects exclusively when writing the manuscript. However, individuals are patients before enrollment. When referring to the broader population of individuals who might benefit from the research findings, the word patients is likely more correct. Participant and volunteer are other terms that can be used in place of subject. Individuals who participated in survey research are typically referred to as respondents . 24

In addition to humans, research subjects may also involve animals or organisms such as cells. When animals are studied, the methods should describe the species, weight, age, and sex of the animals. 6 Ring et al 25 used ex vivo porcine lungs to evaluate the effect of breathing pattern and nebulization on exhaled viral content during mechanical ventilation. The authors reported that the lungs were sourced from a retail processing facility and were from 6-month-old Yorkshire hybrid pigs that weighed 118 kg. In addition, it was noted that approval to conduct the study was granted by the local Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. This publication demonstrates an appropriate description of animal subjects, including an ethics statement.

• Equipment and Other Materials

Identify all equipment and other materials used in the study, including devices, related accessories, drugs, or chemicals. At first mention of any device, provide the specific name of the item, model number if applicable, and manufacturer information. Many scientific journals do not usually allow use of trademark or registration symbols. 10 The ICMJE recommends that manufacturer name and location be included in parentheses. 16 For example, a study that evaluated the safety and feasibility of breathing high-dose nitric oxide in healthy volunteers used a Sievers 280i nitric oxide analyzer (GE Analytical Instruments, Boulder, Colorado) to measure nitric oxide gas concentration. 26 Subsequent mentions of equipment should be noted by generic name versus trade name when possible. It is important that the methods section does not project any bias that an author may have for a specific device or manufacturer.

Use of figures can be an effective means of providing a visual description of the equipment setup, especially when there are many components involved. This can also help reduce the amount of text and improve understanding of how the equipment was assembled. Figures can be either a photograph of the equipment or a graphic illustration (line drawing), but all components should be clearly labeled. An illustration of the setup used to deliver high-dose nitric oxide in the aforementioned study is provided in Figure 1 . 26 Use of a photograph to depict the experimental setup for measuring peak expiratory flow during mechanical insufflation-exsufflation is demonstrated in Figure 2 . 27 Photographs should be of good quality and include all relevant items. In both examples, all components are clearly identified and labeled.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Graphic illustration of an experimental setup. From Reference 26.

Photograph of an experimental setup. From Reference 27.

In addition to naming the specific equipment used in the study, settings should also be included in the methods section because these details are highly relevant for duplication of the study. For example, the evaluation of peak expiratory flow during mechanical insufflation-exsufflation provided the pressure settings used during therapy. 27 Not only is this important for repeating the study, but it is also essential for assessing the validity of the results. If the settings were not typical of those used in the study population or in clinical practice, then this would introduce limitations to interpreting and understanding the results.

Equipment preparation is another consideration for the methods section. Describe the calibration process and the frequency for equipment that requires calibration. The flow meter used to measure peak expiratory flow during mechanical insufflation-exsufflation was calibrated and validated annually by the manufacturer. 27 If manufacturer standards for calibration are not followed, then the accuracy of the results may be affected. It should be noted that calibration and validation represent two different processes. 4 Both should be described as applicable.

In addition to equipment, identify all drugs, chemicals, gases, or other materials used specifically for the study. The details for drugs and gases should include the concentration, dose, frequency, and route of administration. Gases should also note the flow used. Chemicals should be noted with the name and concentration as applicable. Use the generic name for drugs. If the trade name for a drug is relevant to the study, then follow the same process for identifying equipment brands and manufacturer information and use the generic name after initial identification. Preparation information may be needed in some cases. For example, detailed preparation information was provided for the bacteriophage used in the animal study conducted by Ring et al. 25 The process for how the bacteriophage was prepared was described in detail as well as the amounts used for the study.

• Study Procedures

The methods section should explicitly detail all procedures, treatments, or interventions used in the study. This portion of the methods section describes how study procedures were performed, the chronological order of procedures, measurements or calculations made, and the specific data elements collected. A rationale may be needed for some procedures, depending on the audience. 6 Outcome measures are often included in the subsection for study procedures, but some authors report them in the overall description for study design.

A comprehensive explanation of the procedures is vital for providing adequate details for reproducibility and validity regardless of the study design. A retrospective cohort study investigated outcomes of children treated with continuous albuterol that contains benzalkonium chloride and preservative-free solutions. 28 Collected data were clearly stated and included subject demographics, diagnosis, mortality risk score, albuterol dose and duration, use of adjunctive therapies, and respiratory support. The methods section for this paper also reported the source of the data extraction (electronic medical records, database, manual chart review) and the process for how therapies were initiated, escalated, and de-escalated (intensivist discretion). 28 The basis for the use of therapies in this study is an important consideration for generalizability because practices vary among institutions and some care might involve the use of protocols.

Diagrams and flow charts can be helpful for illustrating processes or workflow. An evaluation of sputum volume obtained with different cough augmentation techniques outlined the protocol in an illustrated timeline for the sequence of interventions and data collection ( Fig. 3 ). 29 The timeline provides clear information for the procedures that were done, when they were done, and the data elements collected. Data were collected at baseline, at the end of the intervention, and then 1 h after the intervention, followed by a minimum 4-h washout period before the second intervention and data collection. 29 Details with regard to who performed the interventions (5 experienced respiratory clinicians), how they were administered (cough augmentation technique and settings), and subject information (positioning) were comprehensively described.

Illustrated timeline of study protocol that depicts chronological order. From Reference 29.

Measurements obtained during study procedures should be identified along with a description of how they were obtained and the devices used. For example, the same study measured ventilator parameters before, during, and after interventions by using a Fluxmed GrH monitor (MBMED, Buenos Aires, Argentina). 29 Procedures for measurements or techniques with established references do not have to be described in detail and can be omitted if the procedure could be repeated without the specific details. 6 , 12 , 14 This is a common practice for measurements obtained during spirometry. In those instances, provide the reference for the previous work without providing all of the additional details. In a study that aimed to correlate baseline spirometry with airway hyper-responsiveness in methacholine challenge, the reported testing was performed according to published guidelines. 30 The guideline was referenced without providing all the specifics. On the contrary, studies that used novel methods would need to be further described. 6

The outcome measures that address the research question should be clearly stated. Outcome measures are the dependent or response variables assessed to evaluate the impact of the research that is established before beginning the study. 6 , 8 Outcome measures may include both primary and secondary outcomes. The primary outcome is the main measure of the research question, and secondary outcomes provide additional information for interpreting results. The retrospective evaluation of different albuterol solutions used ICU and hospital length of stay as primary outcomes and duration of continuous albuterol, use and duration of adjunctive therapies, and need for mechanical ventilation as secondary outcomes. 28 The primary outcome was sputum volume for the trial that assessed cough augmentation techniques, and secondary outcomes were respiratory mechanics and hemodynamics. 29

• Statistical Analysis

The statistical analysis component is typically included as the last part of the methods section. This subsection describes how the collected data were analyzed through identification of the statistical tests that were used and the P value threshold for statistical significance. A clinical trial that evaluated the effect of endotracheal tube scraping during mechanical ventilation reported that categorical variables were analyzed with the chi-square or Fisher exact test, and continuous variables were presented as mean ± SD or median (interquartile range) based on distribution and analyzed with t test or Mann-Whitney test. 31 P < .05 was considered significant. The statistical analysis section of this paper distinctly identified the tests used to analyze specific data points and provided an explanation for when mean or median was reported.

The statistical analysis should also describe how the power analysis was conducted to determine the appropriate sample size. Justification for the approach should be provided when needed. For example, the study that evaluated the effect of endotracheal tube scraping calculated sample size for each treatment group based on previous institutional data for the mean duration of mechanical ventilation and determined that each group needed 136 subjects with an alpha of 0.05 and power of 0.80. 31 Citing references for the rationale and justification for the selected statistical tests is also an approach to support the choice of test. The previously noted evaluation of methacholine reactivity used a reference to support the use of partition analysis. 30 The software package and version used for data analysis should also be specified in the data analysis portion of the methods section. 16

• A Methods Model

Several publications were used throughout this paper to demonstrate the different elements of the methods section of a research paper. A summary of each of those elements and the individual components comprised within each subsection adapted from the endotracheal tube scraping clinical trial are included in Table 2 . 31 It is important to note how some items were further described in the text, such as the technique for airway suctioning, the definition of a successful spontaneous breathing trial, an explanation for extubation outcome, the elements of the ventilator-associated event prevention bundle, and how ventilator-associated events were defined. These specifics provide additional information to help determine validity and generalizability, and highlight the importance of including enough detail to duplicate the study.

Summary of Methods Elements and Details from a Published Paper

The methods section is an important part of a manuscript because it provides information on the validity of the study. One of the main reasons for manuscript rejection is an inadequate description of the methods. Enough detail must be provided so others could repeat the study and reproduce the results, similar to following a recipe. The methods section should be structured for logical and chronological flow, and be written in past tense. There are multiple components of the methods section that must be adequately described and thoroughly detailed to provide an understanding of how the results were obtained to interpret the findings. Subheadings can be helpful for organizing the methods section into subsections when there is a considerable amount of information to report, but subheadings should be used judiciously. A well-written methods section will guide the reader through the research process and provide adequate information to evaluate study validity and credibility of the results as well as reproduce the work.

• Correspondence: Denise Willis MSc RRT RRT-NPS AE-C FAARC, Respiratory Care Services, Arkansas Children’s Hospital, 1 Children’s Way, Slot 303, Little Rock, AR 72202. E-mail: WillisLD{at}archildrens.org

Ms Willis is a Section Editor for R espiratory C are .

Ms Willis presented a version of this paper at the symposium Research in Respiratory Care at AARC Congress 2022 held November 8, 2022, in New Orleans, Louisiana.

• Copyright © 2023 by Daedalus Enterprises
• Stenson JF ,
• Lendner M ,
• Annesley TM
• Ghasemi A ,
• Bahadoran Z ,
• Zadeh-Vakili A ,
• Montazeri SA ,
• Hosseinpanah F
• Azevedo LF ,
• Canário-Almeida F ,
• Almeida Fonseca J ,
• Costa-Pereira A ,
• Hespanhol V
• 16. ↵ International Committee of Medical Journal Editors . Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals . Updated May 2022 . https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/ . Accessed July 6, 2023
• Zaccagnini M ,
• 20. ↵ United States Department of Health and Human Services . 45 Code of Federal Regulations Part 46 . https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/index.html . Accessed July 6, 2023
• 21. ↵ National Institutes of Health Office of Laboratory and Animal Welfare . Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals . https://olawnihgov/policies-laws/phs-policyhtm 2015 . Accessed July 6, 2023.
• Truumees M ,
• Tonzola D ,
• Cerrone F ,
• Zimmerman D ,
• Goodfellow LT
• Pestana K ,
• Sombatsaphay V ,
• Morais CCA ,
• Mueller AL ,
• Al-Subu AM ,
• Friestrom E ,
• Langkamp MR ,
• Yngsdal-Krenz RA ,
• Martinez-Alejos R ,
• Marti J-D ,
• Li Bassi G ,
• Gonzalez-Anton D ,
• Pilar-Diaz X ,
• Reginault T ,
• Hunninghake JC ,
• McCullough SB ,
• McCann ET ,
• Charlton ME ,
• Villanueva KA ,

In this issue

• Table of Contents
• Table of Contents (PDF)
• Cover (PDF)
• Index by author

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Association for Respiratory Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Citation Manager Formats

• EndNote (tagged)
• EndNote 8 (xml)
• RefWorks Tagged
• Ref Manager

• Tweet Widget
• Facebook Like
• Google Plus One

Jump to section

Related articles, cited by....

• Campus News
• Student News
• UK HealthCare
• UK Happenings
• Arts & Culture
• Professional News

Women Making History: UK researcher works to reduce harms from substance use

Video produced by UK Research Communications. To view captions for this video, push play and click on the CC icon in the bottom right-hand corner of the screen. If using a mobile device, click on the "thought bubble" in the same area.

Throughout March, the University of Kentucky is spotlighting Women Making History during Women’s History Month. These women are leading their fields of research and impacting the lives of Kentuckians.

LEXINGTON, Ky. (March 29, 2024) —  For more than a decade, a University of Kentucky researcher has been developing new methods to help and empathetically serve people struggling with substance use disorder to reduce some of the harm that they experience. April Young, Ph.D., professor in the UK College of Public Health and faculty associate with the UK Center on Drug and Alcohol Research (CDAR) discovered her passion when she was growing up in rural Georgia.

“I decided I wanted to do research when I was young. I was exposed to science in elementary school,” said Young. “It was then when I realized that I don't have to necessarily take someone else's word for it. I don't have to wait for someone else to find a solution to a problem. I can study it and determine the answer using my own approach.”

Young credits the strong support she received from her family and mentorship she received from her teachers, many of whom were women, for encouraging her love of science.

“I went into my undergraduate degree at Transylvania University and found a mentor there who was doing research. She inspired me to pursue being a faculty member and to work in the field of public health.” 

Kentucky ranked 4th in the nation in overdose deaths in 2021, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Since 2009, Young has conducted substance use research and has led five federally funded studies including projects focused on identifying community-rooted solutions for addressing drug-related harms such as overdose and hepatitis C. One such project is the Kentucky Communities and Researchers Engaging to Halt the Opioid Epidemic (CARE2HOPE) that she led with her colleague, Hannah Cooper, Sc.D., Emory University .  CARE2HOPE was awarded the American Public Health Association (APHA) Epidemiology Section’s 2023 Public Health Practice Award .

“When we talk with people who are actively using drugs or who have a substance use disorder, what I see is that these are amazing people with a lot of potential, a lot of creativity, and who deserve compassion," said Young. "They are experiencing barriers that have been set up through policies and social structures that set them behind, and instead of helping them get back on their feet, society often just puts hurdles in their way to recovery.”

Some of those hurdles often include transportation to treatment, being refused prescriptions, criminal legal system involvement, and stigma. Young’s work is focusing on ways to overcome these obstacles by creating more confidential ways for those who are using drugs to engage in services like syringe service programs.

“We’ve realized that we need to use some out-of-the-box, innovative approaches,” she said. “We’ve gone into communities to recruit people who use drugs by doing everything from grilling hot dogs at gas stations and parking lots to trying to find strategies where the health department can do outreach in places like encampments of people experiencing houselessness. We’re changing the model and taking services to the people rather than expecting them to come to us.”

Young is currently teaching a class on substance use through the public health lens for undergraduate students in collaboration with Angie Carman, Dr.P.H., UK College of Public Health.

“I have tried to put people who use drugs in a position to talk with the students," Young said. "We’ve had panels of people who are actively using or are in the very early stages of remission and the students have had a chance to submit questions to them. I think that that has been one of the most powerful parts of the class. All of that came from what I've learned through our research.

“I feel well-supported as a woman in research at the University of Kentucky. We have a female chair, a female dean and a female vice president for research. By having those people involved, I can see a career path if I was to ever want to move forward in leadership and research. I’m surrounded by amazing colleagues in the Center on Drug and Alcohol Research, most of whom are women, and who’ve been doing this for more than 20 years. I can see paths forward and all around me with women doing research.”

Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number UH3DA044798. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. 

As the state’s flagship, land-grant institution, the University of Kentucky exists to advance the Commonwealth. We do that by preparing the next generation of leaders — placing students at the heart of everything we do — and transforming the lives of Kentuckians through education, research and creative work, service and health care. We pride ourselves on being a catalyst for breakthroughs and a force for healing, a place where ingenuity unfolds. It's all made possible by our people — visionaries, disruptors and pioneers — who make up 200 academic programs, a $476.5 million research and development enterprise and a world-class medical center, all on one campus.   

In 2022, UK was ranked by Forbes as one of the “Best Employers for New Grads” and named a “Diversity Champion” by INSIGHT into Diversity, a testament to our commitment to advance Kentucky and create a community of belonging for everyone. While our mission looks different in many ways than it did in 1865, the vision of service to our Commonwealth and the world remains the same. We are the University for Kentucky.   

Latest Stories

Women making history: uk researcher champions thinking through making, kentucky blood center returns to uk april 1–5, look up — safely uk experts offer insights on april 8 total solar eclipse, uk to host 1st multicultural unity gala for graduate and professional students.