dissertation result

Dissertation & Thesis Guides
Basics of Dissertation & Thesis Writing
How to Write a Results Section for a Dissertation or Research Paper: Guide & Examples
Speech Topics
Basics of Essay Writing
Essay Topics
Other Essays
Main Academic Essays
Research Paper Topics
Basics of Research Paper Writing
Miscellaneous
Chicago/ Turabian
Data & Statistics
Methodology
Admission Writing Tips
Admission Advice
Other Guides
Student Life
Studying Tips
Understanding Plagiarism
Academic Writing Tips

Essay Guides
Research Paper Guides
Formatting Guides
Basics of Research Process
Admission Guides

How to Write a Results Section for a Dissertation or Research Paper: Guide & Examples

Table of contents

Use our free Readability checker

A results section is a crucial part of a research paper or dissertation, where you analyze your major findings. This section goes beyond simply presenting study outcomes. You should also include a comprehensive statistical analysis and interpret the collected data in detail.

Without dissertation research results, it is impossible to imagine a scientific work. Your task here is to present your study findings. What are qualitative or quantitative indicators? How to use tables and diagrams? How to describe data? Our article answers all these questions and many more. So, read further to discover how to analyze and describe your research indexes or contact or professionals for dissertation help from StudyCrumb.

What Is a Results Section of Dissertation?

The results section of a dissertation is a data statement from your research. Here you should present the main findings of your study to your readers. This section aims to show information objectively, systematically, concisely. It is allowed using text supplemented with illustrations. In general, this section's length is not limited but should include all necessary data. Interpretations or conclusions should not be included in this section. Therefore, in theory, this is one of your shortest sections. But it can also be one of the most challenging sections. The introduction presents a research topic and answers the question "why?". The Methods section explains the data collection process and answers "how?". Meanwhile, the result section shows actual data gained from experiments and tells "what?" Thus, this part plays a critical role in highlighting study's relevance. This chapter gives reader study relevance with novelty. So, you should figure out how to write it correctly. Here are main tasks that you should keep in mind while writing:

Results answer the question "What was found in your research?"
Results contain only your study's outcome. They do not include comments or interpretations.
Results must always be presented accurately & objectively.
Tables & figures are used to draw readers' attention. But the same data should never be presented in the form of a table and a figure. Don't repeat anything from a table also in text.

Dissertation: Results vs Discussion vs Conclusion

Results and discussion sections of a dissertation are often confused among researchers. Sometimes both these parts are mixed up with a conclusion for thesis . Figured out what is covered in each of these important chapters. Your readers should see that you notice how different they are. A clear understanding of differences will help you write your dissertation more effectively. 5 differences between Results VS Discussion VS Conclusion:

Wanna figure out the actual difference between discussion vs conclusion? Check out our helpful articles about Dissertation Discussion or Dissertation Conclusion.

Present Your Findings When Writing Results Section of Dissertation

Now it's time to understand how to arrange the results section of the dissertation. First, present most general findings, then narrow it down to a more specific one. Describe both qualitative & quantitative results. For example, imagine you are comparing the behavior of hamsters and mice. First, say a few words about the behavioral type of mammals that you studied. Then, mention rodents in general. At end, describe specific species of animals you carried out an experiment on.

Qualitative Results Section in Dissertation

In your dissertation results section, qualitative data may not be directly related to specific sub-questions or hypotheses. You can structure this chapter around main issues that arise when analyzing data. For each question, make a general observation of what data show. For example, you may recall recurring agreements or differences, patterns, trends. Personal answers are the basis of your research. Clarify and support these views with direct quotes. Add more information to the thesis appendix if it's needed.

Quantitative Results Section in a Dissertation

The easiest way to write a quantitative dissertation results section is to build it around a sub-question or hypothesis of your research. For each subquery, provide relevant results and include statistical analysis . Then briefly evaluate importance & reliability. Notice how each result relates to the problem or whether it supports the hypothesis. Focus on key trends, differences, and relationships between data. But don't speculate about their meaning or consequences. This should be put in the discussion vs conclusion section. Suppose your results are not directly related to answering your questions. Maybe there is additional information that helps readers understand how you collect data. In that case, you can include them in the appendix. It is often helpful to include visual elements such as graphs, charts, and tables. But only if they accurately support your results and add value.

Tables and Figures in Results Section in Dissertation

We recommend you use tables or figures in the dissertation results section correctly. Such interpretation can effectively present complex data concisely and visually. It allows readers to quickly gain a statistical overview. On the contrary, poorly designed graphs can confuse readers. That will reduce the effectiveness of your article. Here are our recommendations that help you understand how to use tables and figures:

Make sure tables and figures are self-explanatory. Sometimes, your readers may look at tables and figures before reading the entire text. So they should make sense as separate elements.
Do not repeat the content of tables and figures in text. Text can be used to highlight key points from tables and figures. But do not repeat every element.
Make sure that values or information in tables and text are consistent. Make sure that abbreviations, group names, interpretations are the same as in text.
Use clear, informative titles for tables and figures. Do not leave any table or figure without a title or legend. Otherwise, readers will not be able to understand data's meaning. Also, make sure column names, labels, figures are understandable.
Check accuracy of data presented in tables and figures. Always double-check tables and figures to make sure numbers converge.
Tables should not contain redundant information. Make sure tables in the article are not too crowded. If you need to provide extensive data, use Appendixes.
Make sure images are clear. Make sure images and all parts of drawings are precise. Lettering should be in a standard font and legible against the background of the picture.
Ask for permission to use illustrations. If you use illustrations, be sure to ask copyright holders and indicate them.

Tips on How to Write a Results Section

We have prepared several tips on how to write the results section of the dissertation! Present data collected during study objectively, logically, and concisely. Highlight most important results and organize them into specific sections. It is an excellent way to show that you have covered all the descriptive information you need. Correct usage of visual elements effectively helps your readers with understanding. So, follow main 3 rules for writing this part:

State only actual results. Leave explanations and comments for Discussion.
Use text, tables, and pictures to orderly highlight key results.
Make sure that contents of tables and figures are not repeated in text.

In case you have questions about a conceptual framework in research , you will find a blog dedicated to this issue in our database.

What to Avoid When Writing the Results Section of a Dissertation

Here we will discuss how NOT to write the results section of a dissertation. Or simply, what points to avoid:

Do not make your research too complicated. Your paper, tables, and graphs should be clearly marked and follow order. So that they can exist independently without further explanation.
Do not include raw data. Remember, you are summarizing relevant results, not reporting them in detail. This chapter should briefly summarize your findings. Avoid complete introduction to each number and calculation.
Do not contradict errors or false results. Explain these errors and contradictions in conclusions. This often happens when different research methods have been used.
Do not write a conclusion or discussion. Instead, this part should contain summaries of findings.
Do not tend to include explanations and inferences from results. Such an approach can make this chapter subjective, unclear, and confusing to the reader.
Do not forget about novelty. Its lack is one of the main reasons for the paper's rejection.

Dissertation Results Section Example

Let's take a look at some good results section of dissertation examples. Remember that this part shows fundamental research you've done in detail. So, it has to be clear and concise, as you can see in the sample.

Final Thoughts on Writing Results Section of Dissertation

When writing a results section of a dissertation, highlight your achievements by data. The main chapter's task is to convince the reader of conclusions' validity of your research. You should not overload text with too detailed information. Never use words whose meanings you do not understand. Also, oversimplification may seem unconvincing for readers. But on the other hand, writing this part can even be fun. You can directly see your study results, which you'll interpret later. So keep going, and we wish you courage!

Writing any academic paper is long and thorough work. But StudyCrumb got you back! Our professional writers will deliver any type of work quickly and excellently!

Joe Eckel is an expert on Dissertations writing. He makes sure that each student gets precious insights on composing A-grade academic writing.

Research Voyage

Research Tips and Infromation

How to Write the Results Section of your Dissertation or Thesis?

Introduction

Organizing your results, providing context, presenting the data in results section, describing statistical analysis, reporting the findings in results section, supporting the findings, visual representation in results section.

As you progress on your journey towards completing your PhD or Post Graduate dissertation, one of the most critical sections that holds immense significance is the results section.

Results section serves as the pinnacle of your research, where you unveil the outcomes of your exhaustive efforts and shed light on the answers to your research questions. In this blog post, we will delve into the intricacies of the results section and explore how to effectively present and interpret your findings to leave a lasting impact.

Whether you’re conducting research in the field of biology, psychology, computer science, or any other discipline, the results section is where your data takes center stage. It is a space where you showcase your meticulous analysis, statistical methods, and the discoveries you’ve made along the way. By understanding the key components and best practices for constructing a compelling results section, you can present your findings in a manner that resonates with both your academic peers and the wider research community.

In this comprehensive guide, we will walk you through the fundamental elements of the results section, from organizing your data to choosing the appropriate visual representations. We will explore the importance of clear and concise reporting, emphasizing the significance of providing contextual information and highlighting any unexpected or groundbreaking discoveries.

Furthermore, we will discuss strategies for effectively interpreting your results, discussing their implications, and connecting them back to your research objectives. By mastering these skills, you will be able to demonstrate the significance of your work, contribute to the existing body of knowledge, and potentially pave the way for further research in your field.

Throughout the blog post, I will provide concrete examples from various disciplines to illustrate the implementation of these techniques. Additionally, I will offer valuable tips on avoiding common pitfalls, ensuring the accuracy and reliability of your results, and seeking feedback from your advisors or peers to enhance the quality of your analysis.

If you are in paucity of time, not confident of your writing skills and in a hurry to complete the writing task then you can think of hiring a research consultant that solves all your problems. Please visit my article on Hiring a Research consultant for your PhD tasks for further details.

Organizing the results of your study in a logical and coherent manner is crucial for effectively communicating your findings. By presenting your results in an organized structure, you enhance the clarity and readability of your dissertation. Here are some key considerations for organizing your results:

Research studies often involve complex algorithms, software implementations, experimental data, and performance metrics. It is essential to organize these diverse elements in a cohesive manner to make it easier for readers to follow your research. A well-structured results section enables readers to understand the progression of your experiments and the relationship between different findings.
Begin by reminding readers of the research questions or hypotheses that guided your study. This alignment helps establish a clear connection between the objectives of your research and the subsequent presentation of results. For example, if your research question focuses on evaluating the efficiency of a new sorting algorithm, you would present the experimental data, performance metrics, and comparative analyses specific to that algorithm in relation to the research question.
Subsubsection 1.1: Experimental Setup
Subsubsection 1.2: Experimental Results and Analysis
Subsubsection 2.1: Performance Metrics
Subsubsection 2.2: Comparative Results and Discussion

Remember to tailor the organization of your results section to the specific requirements of your research. The key is to provide a logical flow and structure that enables readers to easily comprehend and interpret your findings.

Providing context for the results of your study is essential to help readers understand the significance and implications of your findings. By offering background information and study design details, you establish a foundation upon which the results can be properly interpreted. Here are some key considerations for providing context:

Before delving into the results, it is important to provide readers with relevant background information about the topic or problem being addressed. This may include a literature review of existing research, theories, or methodologies in the field. By doing so, you situate your work within the broader landscape of and demonstrate its relevance. Additionally, explain the design of your study, such as the specific algorithms, software frameworks, datasets, or hardware setups used. This ensures that readers understand the context in which your results were obtained.
Provide a brief overview of the current state-of-the-art in image recognition algorithms and their limitations.
Explain the specific challenges or gaps in the existing methods that motivated your research.
Describe the design of your study, including the choice of machine learning techniques, datasets used for training and evaluation, preprocessing steps, and any hardware or software configurations.

By providing context, you allow readers to understand the background, motivation, and methodology behind your research. This sets the stage for better comprehension and interpretation of your results. Contextualizing your findings, as it helps establish the relevance, novelty, and potential impact of your research within the larger field.

Presenting data in a clear and organized manner is crucial for effectively communicating your results. The way you present your data can greatly impact the reader’s understanding and interpretation of your findings. Here are some key considerations for presenting data:

Presenting performance metrics of different algorithms using a table to allow for easy comparison.
Using a line graph to depict the improvement in accuracy over training iterations in a machine learning model.
Employing a bar chart to compare the execution times of different algorithms on a specific dataset.
Clear labelling and formatting of your data ensure that readers can easily understand and interpret the information presented. Label each table, figure, chart, or graph with a concise and descriptive title. Ensure that axes, legends, and labels are clearly labelled and units of measurement are specified. Use appropriate fonts, colours, and styles to enhance readability. Consider providing captions or footnotes to provide additional context or explanations where necessary.
In the text, refer to a specific table presenting the accuracy results of different algorithms and explain how these results support your research hypothesis or contribute to the field.
Discuss a figure showing the relationship between the number of training examples and the performance of a machine learning model, emphasizing its implications for scalability and generalization.

By presenting data in a visually appealing and well-organized manner, you enhance the clarity and accessibility of your results. Proper labelling, formatting, and referring to each table or figure in the text help readers navigate the information and grasp its significance. Remember to choose the most appropriate format for your data and use visuals to support and reinforce your findings.

The inclusion of statistical analyses in the results section is crucial for providing objective and quantitative evidence to support your findings. Statistical analyses help you draw meaningful conclusions from your data and determine the significance of observed results. Here are some key considerations for describing statistical analyses:

Statistical analyses play a vital role in determining the reliability and significance of your findings. They provide a systematic and objective framework for interpreting the data and testing hypotheses. Discuss the importance of including statistical analyses in the results section to demonstrate the rigour and validity of your research.
Describe using a t-test to compare the means of two groups in a user study, as it is appropriate for assessing the statistical significance of differences.
Explain employing logistic regression to model the relationship between independent variables and a binary outcome in a predictive analytics study.
Report the p-value as 0.032, indicating a statistically significant difference between the two groups at the 0.05 significance level.
Interpret an effect size of 0.40 as a medium-sized effect, highlighting its practical importance in the context of the research.

By describing the statistical analyses conducted, explaining the rationale behind the chosen tests, and accurately presenting the statistical values and interpretations, you strengthen the validity and reliability of your findings. Statistical analyses provide an objective framework for drawing conclusions from your data and lend credibility to your research in the computer science domain.

Reporting the findings of your research in an objective, concise, and clear manner is essential for effectively communicating your results. Here are some key considerations for reporting the findings:

Summarize the key findings of a machine learning study by stating that “the proposed algorithm achieved an average accuracy of 85% on the test dataset, outperforming existing state-of-the-art methods by 10%.”
For a research question about the impact of different programming languages on software performance, present specific metrics such as execution time or memory usage for each language, along with a comparison and interpretation of the results.
Instead of using overly technical language, communicate the results in a more accessible way: “The experimental results showed a significant correlation between the number of training samples and the accuracy of the model, indicating that a larger training dataset leads to improved prediction performance.”

By guiding readers on summarizing the results objectively and concisely, addressing each research question or hypothesis, and using clear and concise language, you ensure that your findings are communicated effectively. This approach allows readers to understand the core contributions of your research and how they align with the research questions or hypotheses you set out to investigate.

Providing strong evidence from the data to support your findings, addressing unexpected or contradictory results, and discussing limitations and potential explanations are essential components of reporting research findings. Here are some key considerations for supporting the findings:

Present empirical evidence from a user study, such as participant feedback or performance metrics, to support the usability and effectiveness of a proposed user interface design.
If a software system performed unexpectedly poorly in certain scenarios, discuss potential factors such as data bias, implementation issues, or limitations of the evaluation methodology that could have influenced the results.
Acknowledge limitations such as a small sample size, limited dataset availability, or computational constraints that might affect the generalizability or robustness of the results.
Discuss potential explanations for unexpected results, such as issues with data quality, algorithmic complexity, or model assumptions.

By providing evidence from the data to support the findings, addressing unexpected or contradictory results, and discussing limitations and potential explanations, you demonstrate a rigorous and reflective approach to your research in the computer science domain. This allows readers to assess the strength and reliability of your findings and gain a deeper understanding of the nuances and implications of your work.

Using visual representations, such as tables, graphs, and figures, alongside the text can greatly enhance the understanding and impact of your findings. Here are some key considerations for visual representation:

Visual representations offer several benefits in presenting research findings. They provide a concise and intuitive way to convey complex information, trends, and patterns. Visuals can help readers grasp key insights at a glance, enhance the overall readability of the document, and make the findings more memorable. Visual representations also facilitate effective comparisons, highlight important relationships, and aid in storytelling. Example:

When creating visual representations, consider the following tips to ensure clarity and effectiveness: a. Choose the appropriate visual format: Select the most suitable format, such as tables, line graphs, scatter plots, or heatmaps, based on the nature of the data and the message you want to convey.

b. Simplify and declutter: Avoid overwhelming the visuals with excessive data points, labels, or unnecessary decorations. Keep the design clean and focused on conveying the essential information.

c. Label and title clearly: Provide descriptive and informative titles for tables, graphs, and figures. Label the axes, data points, or components clearly to facilitate understanding.

d. Use colors and visual cues purposefully: Utilize colors and visual cues to highlight important information or differentiate between categories. Ensure that the chosen colors are distinguishable and accessible. e. Provide legends and captions: Include legends to explain symbols, colors, or abbreviations used in the visuals. Provide informative captions or annotations to guide readers in interpreting the visuals accurately. Example:

By incorporating clear and effective visual representations alongside the text, you enhance the presentation and understanding of your research findings in the computer science domain. Well-designed tables, graphs, and figures can simplify complex information, facilitate comparisons, and enhance the visual appeal of your dissertation. Remember to choose appropriate formats, keep the visuals uncluttered, label clearly, and use colors and visual cues purposefully to maximize their impact.

Writing the results section of a dissertation or thesis is a critical task that requires careful attention to detail, organization, and effective communication. Throughout this blog post, we have explored key elements to consider when crafting this section.

Upcoming Events

Visit the Upcoming International Conferences at Exotic Travel Destinations with Travel Plan
Visit for Research Internships Worldwide

Writing your Dissertation: Results and Discussion

When writing a dissertation or thesis, the results and discussion sections can be both the most interesting as well as the most challenging sections to write.

You may choose to write these sections separately, or combine them into a single chapter, depending on your university’s guidelines and your own preferences.

There are advantages to both approaches.

Writing the results and discussion as separate sections allows you to focus first on what results you obtained and set out clearly what happened in your experiments and/or investigations without worrying about their implications.This can focus your mind on what the results actually show and help you to sort them in your head.

However, many people find it easier to combine the results with their implications as the two are closely connected.

Check your university’s requirements carefully before combining the results and discussions sections as some specify that they must be kept separate.

Results Section

The Results section should set out your key experimental results, including any statistical analysis and whether or not the results of these are significant.

You should cover any literature supporting your interpretation of significance. It does not have to include everything you did, particularly for a doctorate dissertation. However, for an undergraduate or master's thesis, you will probably find that you need to include most of your work.

You should write your results section in the past tense: you are describing what you have done in the past.

Every result included MUST have a method set out in the methods section. Check back to make sure that you have included all the relevant methods.

Conversely, every method should also have some results given so, if you choose to exclude certain experiments from the results, make sure that you remove mention of the method as well.

If you are unsure whether to include certain results, go back to your research questions and decide whether the results are relevant to them. It doesn’t matter whether they are supportive or not, it’s about relevance. If they are relevant, you should include them.

Having decided what to include, next decide what order to use. You could choose chronological, which should follow the methods, or in order from most to least important in the answering of your research questions, or by research question and/or hypothesis.

You also need to consider how best to present your results: tables, figures, graphs, or text. Try to use a variety of different methods of presentation, and consider your reader: 20 pages of dense tables are hard to understand, as are five pages of graphs, but a single table and well-chosen graph that illustrate your overall findings will make things much clearer.

Make sure that each table and figure has a number and a title. Number tables and figures in separate lists, but consecutively by the order in which you mention them in the text. If you have more than about two or three, it’s often helpful to provide lists of tables and figures alongside the table of contents at the start of your dissertation.

Summarise your results in the text, drawing on the figures and tables to illustrate your points.

The text and figures should be complementary, not repeat the same information. You should refer to every table or figure in the text. Any that you don’t feel the need to refer to can safely be moved to an appendix, or even removed.

Make sure that you including information about the size and direction of any changes, including percentage change if appropriate. Statistical tests should include details of p values or confidence intervals and limits.

While you don’t need to include all your primary evidence in this section, you should as a matter of good practice make it available in an appendix, to which you should refer at the relevant point.

For example:

Details of all the interview participants can be found in Appendix A, with transcripts of each interview in Appendix B.

You will, almost inevitably, find that you need to include some slight discussion of your results during this section. This discussion should evaluate the quality of the results and their reliability, but not stray too far into discussion of how far your results support your hypothesis and/or answer your research questions, as that is for the discussion section.

See our pages: Analysing Qualitative Data and Simple Statistical Analysis for more information on analysing your results.

Discussion Section

This section has four purposes, it should:

Interpret and explain your results
Answer your research question
Justify your approach
Critically evaluate your study

The discussion section therefore needs to review your findings in the context of the literature and the existing knowledge about the subject.

You also need to demonstrate that you understand the limitations of your research and the implications of your findings for policy and practice. This section should be written in the present tense.

The Discussion section needs to follow from your results and relate back to your literature review . Make sure that everything you discuss is covered in the results section.

Some universities require a separate section on recommendations for policy and practice and/or for future research, while others allow you to include this in your discussion, so check the guidelines carefully.

Starting the Task

Most people are likely to write this section best by preparing an outline, setting out the broad thrust of the argument, and how your results support it.

You may find techniques like mind mapping are helpful in making a first outline; check out our page: Creative Thinking for some ideas about how to think through your ideas. You should start by referring back to your research questions, discuss your results, then set them into the context of the literature, and then into broader theory.

This is likely to be one of the longest sections of your dissertation, and it’s a good idea to break it down into chunks with sub-headings to help your reader to navigate through the detail.

Fleshing Out the Detail

Once you have your outline in front of you, you can start to map out how your results fit into the outline.

This will help you to see whether your results are over-focused in one area, which is why writing up your research as you go along can be a helpful process. For each theme or area, you should discuss how the results help to answer your research question, and whether the results are consistent with your expectations and the literature.

The Importance of Understanding Differences

If your results are controversial and/or unexpected, you should set them fully in context and explain why you think that you obtained them.

Your explanations may include issues such as a non-representative sample for convenience purposes, a response rate skewed towards those with a particular experience, or your own involvement as a participant for sociological research.

You do not need to be apologetic about these, because you made a choice about them, which you should have justified in the methodology section. However, you do need to evaluate your own results against others’ findings, especially if they are different. A full understanding of the limitations of your research is part of a good discussion section.

At this stage, you may want to revisit your literature review, unless you submitted it as a separate submission earlier, and revise it to draw out those studies which have proven more relevant.

Conclude by summarising the implications of your findings in brief, and explain why they are important for researchers and in practice, and provide some suggestions for further work.

You may also wish to make some recommendations for practice. As before, this may be a separate section, or included in your discussion.

The results and discussion, including conclusion and recommendations, are probably the most substantial sections of your dissertation. Once completed, you can begin to relax slightly: you are on to the last stages of writing!

Continue to: Dissertation: Conclusion and Extras Writing your Methodology

See also: Writing a Literature Review Writing a Research Proposal Academic Referencing What Is the Importance of Using a Plagiarism Checker to Check Your Thesis?

How to Write an Impressive Thesis Results Section

After collecting and analyzing your research data, it’s time to write the results section. This article explains how to write and organize the thesis results section, the differences in reporting qualitative and quantitative data, the differences in the thesis results section across different fields, and the best practices for tables and figures.

What is the thesis results section?

The thesis results section factually and concisely describes what was observed and measured during the study but does not interpret the findings. It presents the findings in a logical order.

What should the thesis results section include?

Include all relevant results as text, tables, or figures
Report the results of subject recruitment and data collection
For qualitative research, present the data from all statistical analyses, whether or not the results are significant
For quantitative research, present the data by coding or categorizing themes and topics
Present all secondary findings (e.g., subgroup analyses)
Include all results, even if they do not fit in with your assumptions or support your hypothesis

What should the thesis results section not include?

If the study involves the thematic analysis of an interview, don’t include complete transcripts of all interviews. Instead, add these as appendices
Don’t present raw data. These may be included in appendices
Don’t include background information (this should be in the introduction section )
Don’t speculate on the meaning of results that do not support your hypothesis. This will be addressed later in the discussion and conclusion sections.
Don’t repeat results that have been presented in tables and figures. Only highlight the pertinent points or elaborate on specific aspects

How should the thesis results section be organized?

The opening paragraph of the thesis results section should briefly restate the thesis question. Then, present the results objectively as text, figures, or tables.

Quantitative research presents the results from experiments and statistical tests , usually in the form of tables and figures (graphs, diagrams, and images), with any pertinent findings emphasized in the text. The results are structured around the thesis question. Demographic data are usually presented first in this section.

For each statistical test used, the following information must be mentioned:

The type of analysis used (e.g., Mann–Whitney U test or multiple regression analysis)
A concise summary of each result, including descriptive statistics (e.g., means, medians, and modes) and inferential statistics (e.g., correlation, regression, and p values) and whether the results are significant
Any trends or differences identified through comparisons
How the findings relate to your research and if they support or contradict your hypothesis

Qualitative research presents results around key themes or topics identified from your data analysis and explains how these themes evolved. The data are usually presented as text because it is hard to present the findings as figures.

For each theme presented, describe:

General trends or patterns observed
Significant or representative responses
Relevant quotations from your study subjects

Relevant characteristics about your study subjects

Differences among the results section in different fields of research

Nevertheless, results should be presented logically across all disciplines and reflect the thesis question and any hypotheses that were tested.

The presentation of results varies considerably across disciplines. For example, a thesis documenting how a particular population interprets a specific event and a thesis investigating customer service may both have collected data using interviews and analyzed it using similar methods. Still, the presentation of the results will vastly differ because they are answering different thesis questions. A science thesis may have used experiments to generate data, and these would be presented differently again, probably involving statistics. Nevertheless, results should be presented logically across all disciplines and reflect the thesis question and any hypotheses that were tested.

Differences between reporting thesis results in the Sciences and the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) domains

In the Sciences domain (qualitative and experimental research), the results and discussion sections are considered separate entities, and the results from experiments and statistical tests are presented. In the HSS domain (qualitative research), the results and discussion sections may be combined.

There are two approaches to presenting results in the HSS field:

If you want to highlight important findings, first present a synopsis of the results and then explain the key findings.
If you have multiple results of equal significance, present one result and explain it. Then present another result and explain that, and so on. Conclude with an overall synopsis.

Best practices for using tables and figures

The use of figures and tables is highly encouraged because they provide a standalone overview of the research findings that are much easier to understand than wading through dry text mentioning one result after another. The text in the results section should not repeat the information presented in figures and tables. Instead, it should focus on the pertinent findings or elaborate on specific points.

Some popular software programs that can be used for the analysis and presentation of statistical data include Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS ) , R software , MATLAB , Microsoft Excel, Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) , GraphPad Prism , and Minitab .

The easiest way to construct tables is to use the Table function in Microsoft Word . Microsoft Excel can also be used; however, Word is the easier option.

General guidelines for figures and tables

Figures and tables must be interpretable independent from the text
Number tables and figures consecutively (in separate lists) in the order in which they are mentioned in the text
All tables and figures must be cited in the text
Provide clear, descriptive titles for all figures and tables
Include a legend to concisely describe what is presented in the figure or table

Figure guidelines

Label figures so that the reader can easily understand what is being shown
Use a consistent font type and font size for all labels in figure panels
All abbreviations used in the figure artwork should be defined in the figure legend

Table guidelines

All table columns should have a heading abbreviation used in tables should be defined in the table footnotes
All numbers and text presented in tables must correlate with the data presented in the manuscript body

Quantitative results example : Figure 3 presents the characteristics of unemployed subjects and their rate of criminal convictions. A statistically significant association was observed between unemployed people <20 years old, the male sex, and no household income.

Qualitative results example: Table 5 shows the themes identified during the face-to-face interviews about the application that we developed to anonymously report corruption in the workplace. There was positive feedback on the app layout and ease of use. Concerns that emerged from the interviews included breaches of confidentiality and the inability to report incidents because of unstable cellphone network coverage.

Table 5. Themes and selected quotes from the evaluation of our app designed to anonymously report workplace corruption.

Tips for writing the thesis results section

Do not state that a difference was present between the two groups unless this can be supported by a significant p-value .
Present the findings only . Do not comment or speculate on their interpretation.
Every result included must have a corresponding method in the methods section. Conversely, all methods must have associated results presented in the results section.
Do not explain commonly used methods. Instead, cite a reference.
Be consistent with the units of measurement used in your thesis study. If you start with kg, then use the same unit all throughout your thesis. Also, be consistent with the capitalization of units of measurement. For example, use either “ml” or “mL” for milliliters, but not both.
Never manipulate measurement outcomes, even if the result is unexpected. Remain objective.

Results vs. discussion vs. conclusion

Results are presented in three sections of your thesis: the results, discussion, and conclusion.

In the results section, the data are presented simply and objectively. No speculation or interpretation is given.
In the discussion section, the meaning of the results is interpreted and put into context (e.g., compared with other findings in the literature ), and its importance is assigned.
In the conclusion section, the results and the main conclusions are summarized.

A thesis is the most crucial document that you will write during your academic studies. For professional thesis editing and thesis proofreading services , visit Enago Thesis Editing for more information.

Editor’s pick

Get free updates.

Subscribe to our newsletter for regular insights from the research and publishing industry!

Review Checklist

Have you completed all data collection procedures and analyzed all results ?

Have you included all results relevant to your thesis question, even if they do not support your hypothesis?

Have you reported the results objectively , with no interpretation or speculation?

For quantitative research, have you included both descriptive and inferential statistical results and stated whether they support or contradict your hypothesis?

Have you used tables and figures to present all results?

In your thesis body, have you presented only the pertinent results and elaborated on specific aspects that were presented in the tables and figures?

Are all tables and figures correctly labeled and cited in numerical order in the text?

Frequently Asked Questions

What file formats do you accept +.

We accept all file formats, including Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, PDF, Latex, etc.

How to identify whether paraphrasing is required? +

We provide a report entailing recommendations for a single Plagiarism Check service. You can also write to us at [email protected] for further assistance as paraphrasing is sold offline and has a relatively high conversion in most geographies.

What information do i need to provide? +

Please upload your research manuscript when you place the order. If you want to include the tables, charts, and figure legends in the plagiarism check, please ensure that all content is in editable formats and in one single document.

Is repetition percentage of 25-30% considered acceptable by the journal for my manuscript? +

Acceptable repetition rate varies by journal but aim for low percentages (usually <5%). Avoid plagiarism, cite sources, and use detection tools. High plagiarism can lead to rejection, reputation damage, and serious consequences. Consult your institution for guidance on addressing plagiarism concerns.

Do you offer help to rewrite and paraphrase the plagiarized text in my manuscript? +

We can certainly help you rewrite and paraphrase text in your manuscript to ensure it is not plagiarized under our Developmental Content rewriting service. You can provide specific passages or sentences that you suspect may be plagiarized, and we can assist you in rephrasing them to ensure originality.

Which international languages does iThenticate have content for in its database? +

iThenticate searches for content matches in the following 30 languages: Chinese (Simplified and Traditional), Japanese, Thai, Korean, Catalan, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Norwegian (Bokmal, Nynorsk), Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Serbian, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish, Swedish, Arabic, Greek, Hebrew, Farsi, Russian, and Turkish. Please note that iThenticate will match your text with text of the same language.

Writing the Dissertation - Guides for Success: The Results and Discussion

Writing the Dissertation Homepage
Overview and Planning
The Literature Review
The Methodology
The Results and Discussion
The Conclusion
The Abstract
The Difference
What to Avoid

Overview of writing the results and discussion

The results and discussion follow on from the methods or methodology chapter of the dissertation. This creates a natural transition from how you designed your study, to what your study reveals, highlighting your own contribution to the research area.

Disciplinary differences

Please note: this guide is not specific to any one discipline. The results and discussion can vary depending on the nature of the research and the expectations of the school or department, so please adapt the following advice to meet the demands of your project and department. Consult your supervisor for further guidance; you can also peruse our Writing Across Subjects guide .

Guide contents

As part of the Writing the Dissertation series, this guide covers the most common conventions of the results and discussion chapters, giving you the necessary knowledge, tips and guidance needed to impress your markers! The sections are organised as follows:

The Difference - Breaks down the distinctions between the results and discussion chapters.
Results - Provides a walk-through of common characteristics of the results chapter.
Discussion - Provides a walk-through of how to approach writing your discussion chapter, including structure.
What to Avoid - Covers a few frequent mistakes you'll want to...avoid!
FAQs - Guidance on first- vs. third-person, limitations and more.
Checklist - Includes a summary of key points and a self-evaluation checklist.

Training and tools

The Academic Skills team has recorded a Writing the Dissertation workshop series to help you with each section of a standard dissertation, including a video on writing the results and discussion (embedded below).
The dissertation planner tool can help you think through the timeline for planning, research, drafting and editing.
iSolutions offers training and a Word template to help you digitally format and structure your dissertation.

Introduction

The results of your study are often followed by a separate chapter of discussion. This is certainly the case with scientific writing. Some dissertations, however, might incorporate both the results and discussion in one chapter. This depends on the nature of your dissertation and the conventions within your school or department. Always follow the guidelines given to you and ask your supervisor for further guidance.

As part of the Writing the Dissertation series, this guide covers the essentials of writing your results and discussion, giving you the necesary knowledge, tips and guidance needed to leave a positive impression on your markers! This guide covers the results and discussion as separate – although interrelated – chapters, as you'll see in the next two tabs. However, you can easily adapt the guidance to suit one single chapter – keep an eye out for some hints on how to do this throughout the guide.

Results or discussion - what's the difference?

To understand what the results and discussion sections are about, we need to clearly define the difference between the two.

The results should provide a clear account of the findings . This is written in a dry and direct manner, simply highlighting the findings as they appear once processed. It’s expected to have tables and graphics, where relevant, to contextualise and illustrate the data.

Rather than simply stating the findings of the study, the discussion interprets the findings to offer a more nuanced understanding of the research. The discussion is similar to the second half of the conclusion because it’s where you consider and formulate a response to the question, ‘what do we now know that we didn’t before?’ (see our Writing the Conclusion guide for more). The discussion achieves this by answering the research questions and responding to any hypotheses proposed. With this in mind, the discussion should be the most insightful chapter or section of your dissertation because it provides the most original insight.

Across the next two tabs of this guide, we will look at the results and discussion chapters separately in more detail.

Writing the results

The results chapter should provide a direct and factual account of the data collected without any interpretation or interrogation of the findings. As this might suggest, the results chapter can be slightly monotonous, particularly for quantitative data. Nevertheless, it’s crucial that you present your results in a clear and direct manner as it provides the necessary detail for your subsequent discussion.

Note: If you’re writing your results and discussion as one chapter, then you can either:

1) write them as distinctly separate sections in the same chapter, with the discussion following on from the results, or...

2) integrate the two throughout by presenting a subset of the results and then discussing that subset in further detail.

Next, we'll explore some of the most important factors to consider when writing your results chapter.

How you structure your results chapter depends on the design and purpose of your study. Here are some possible options for structuring your results chapter (adapted from Glatthorn and Joyner, 2005):

Chronological – depending on the nature of the study, it might be important to present your results in order of how you collected the data, such as a pretest-posttest design.
Research method – if you’ve used a mixed-methods approach, you could isolate each research method and instrument employed in the study.
Research question and/or hypotheses – you could structure your results around your research questions and/or hypotheses, providing you have more than one. However, keep in mind that the results on their own don’t necessarily answer the questions or respond to the hypotheses in a definitive manner. You need to interpret the findings in the discussion chapter to gain a more rounded understanding.
Variable – you could isolate each variable in your study (where relevant) and specify how and whether the results changed.

Tables and figures

For your results, you are expected to convert your data into tables and figures, particularly when dealing with quantitative data. Making use of tables and figures is a way of contextualising your results within the study. It also helps to visually reinforce your written account of the data. However, make sure you’re only using tables and figures to supplement , rather than replace, your written account of the results (see the 'What to avoid' tab for more on this).

Figures and tables need to be numbered in order of when they appear in the dissertation, and they should be capitalised. You also need to make direct reference to them in the text, which you can do (with some variation) in one of the following ways:

Figure 1 shows…

The results of the test (see Figure 1) demonstrate…

The actual figures and tables themselves also need to be accompanied by a caption that briefly outlines what is displayed. For example:

Table 1. Variables of the regression model

Table captions normally appear above the table, whilst figures or other such graphical forms appear below, although it’s worth confirming this with your supervisor as the formatting can change depending on the school or discipline. The style guide used for writing in your subject area (e.g., Harvard, MLA, APA, OSCOLA) often dictates correct formatting of tables, graphs and figures, so have a look at your style guide for additional support.

Using quotations

If your qualitative data comes from interviews and focus groups, your data will largely consist of quotations from participants. When presenting this data, you should identify and group the most common and interesting responses and then quote two or three relevant examples to illustrate this point. Here’s a brief example from a qualitative study on the habits of online food shoppers:

Regardless of whether or not participants regularly engage in online food shopping, all but two respondents commented, in some form, on the convenience of online food shopping:

"It’s about convenience for me. I’m at work all week and the weekend doesn’t allow much time for food shopping, so knowing it can be ordered and then delivered in 24 hours is great for me” (Participant A).

"It fits around my schedule, which is important for me and my family” (Participant D).

"In the past, I’ve always gone food shopping after work, which has always been a hassle. Online food shopping, however, frees up some of my time” (Participant E).

As shown in this example, each quotation is attributed to a particular participant, although their anonymity is protected. The details used to identify participants can depend on the relevance of certain factors to the research. For instance, age or gender could be included.

Writing the discussion

The discussion chapter is where “you critically examine your own results in the light of the previous state of the subject as outlined in the background, and make judgments as to what has been learnt in your work” (Evans et al., 2014: 12). Whilst the results chapter is strictly factual, reporting on the data on a surface level, the discussion is rooted in analysis and interpretation , allowing you and your reader to delve beneath the surface.

Next, we will review some of the most important factors to consider when writing your discussion chapter.

Like the results, there is no single way to structure your discussion chapter. As always, it depends on the nature of your dissertation and whether you’re dealing with qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods research. It’s good to be consistent with the results chapter, so you could structure your discussion chapter, where possible, in the same way as your results.

When it comes to structure, it’s particularly important that you guide your reader through the various points, subtopics or themes of your discussion. You should do this by structuring sections of your discussion, which might incorporate three or four paragraphs around the same theme or issue, in a three-part way that mirrors the typical three-part essay structure of introduction, main body and conclusion.

Cycle of introduction (topic sentence), to main body (analysis), to conclusion (takeaways). Graphic at right shows cycle repeating 3, 5, and 4 times for subtopics A, B, and C.

Figure 1: The three-part cycle that embodies a typical essay structure and reflects how you structure themes or subtopics in your discussion.

This is your topic sentence where you clearly state the focus of this paragraph/section. It’s often a fairly short, declarative statement in order to grab the reader’s attention, and it should be clearly related to your research purpose, such as responding to a research question.

This constitutes your analysis where you explore the theme or focus, outlined in the topic sentence, in further detail by interrogating why this particular theme or finding emerged and the significance of this data. This is also where you bring in the relevant secondary literature.

This is the evaluative stage of the cycle where you explicitly return back to the topic sentence and tell the reader what this means in terms of answering the relevant research question and establishing new knowledge. It could be a single sentence, or a short paragraph, and it doesn’t strictly need to appear at the end of every section or theme. Instead, some prefer to bring the main themes together towards the end of the discussion in a single paragraph or two. Either way, it’s imperative that you evaluate the significance of your discussion and tell the reader what this means.

A note on the three-part structure

This is often how you’re taught to construct a paragraph, but the themes and ideas you engage with at dissertation level are going to extend beyond the confines of a short paragraph. Therefore, this is a structure to guide how you write about particular themes or patterns in your discussion. Think of this structure like a cycle that you can engage in its smallest form to shape a paragraph; in a slightly larger form to shape a subsection of a chapter; and in its largest form to shape the entire chapter. You can 'level up' the same basic structure to accommodate a deeper breadth of thinking and critical engagement.

Using secondary literature

Your discussion chapter should return to the relevant literature (previously identified in your literature review ) in order to contextualise and deepen your reader’s understanding of the findings. This might help to strengthen your findings, or you might find contradictory evidence that serves to counter your results. In the case of the latter, it’s important that you consider why this might be and the implications for this. It’s through your incorporation of secondary literature that you can consider the question, ‘What do we now know that we didn’t before?’

Limitations

You may have included a limitations section in your methodology chapter (see our Writing the Methodology guide ), but it’s also common to have one in your discussion chapter. The difference here is that your limitations are directly associated with your results and the capacity to interpret and analyse those results.

Think of it this way: the limitations in your methodology refer to the issues identified before conducting the research, whilst the limitations in your discussion refer to the issues that emerged after conducting the research. For example, you might only be able to identify a limitation about the external validity or generalisability of your research once you have processed and analysed the data. Try not to overstress the limitations of your work – doing so can undermine the work you’ve done – and try to contextualise them, perhaps by relating them to certain limitations of other studies.

Recommendations

It’s often good to follow your limitations with some recommendations for future research. This creates a neat linearity from what didn’t work, or what could be improved, to how other researchers could address these issues in the future. This helps to reposition your limitations in a positive way by offering an action-oriented response. Try to limit the amount of recommendations you discuss – too many can bring the end of your discussion to a rather negative end as you’re ultimately focusing on what should be done, rather than what you have done. You also don’t need to repeat the recommendations in your conclusion if you’ve included them here.

What to avoid

This portion of the guide will cover some common missteps you should try to avoid in writing your results and discussion.

Over-reliance on tables and figures

It’s very common to produce visual representations of data, such as graphs and tables, and to use these representations in your results chapter. However, the use of these figures should not entirely replace your written account of the data. You don’t need to specify every detail in the data set, but you should provide some written account of what the data shows, drawing your reader’s attention to the most important elements of the data. The figures should support your account and help to contextualise your results. Simply stating, ‘look at Table 1’, without any further detail is not sufficient. Writers often try to do this as a way of saving words, but your markers will know!

Ignoring unexpected or contradictory data

Research can be a complex process with ups and downs, surprises and anomalies. Don’t be tempted to ignore any data that doesn’t meet your expectations, or that perhaps you’re struggling to explain. Failing to report on data for these, and other such reasons, is a problem because it undermines your credibility as a researcher, which inevitably undermines your research in the process. You have to do your best to provide some reason to such data. For instance, there might be some methodological reason behind a particular trend in the data.

Including raw data

You don’t need to include any raw data in your results chapter – raw data meaning unprocessed data that hasn’t undergone any calculations or other such refinement. This can overwhelm your reader and obscure the clarity of the research. You can include raw data in an appendix, providing you feel it’s necessary.

Presenting new results in the discussion

You shouldn’t be stating original findings for the first time in the discussion chapter. The findings of your study should first appear in your results before elaborating on them in the discussion.

Overstressing the significance of your research

It’s important that you clarify what your research demonstrates so you can highlight your own contribution to the research field. However, don’t overstress or inflate the significance of your results. It’s always difficult to provide definitive answers in academic research, especially with qualitative data. You should be confident and authoritative where possible, but don’t claim to reach the absolute truth when perhaps other conclusions could be reached. Where necessary, you should use hedging (see definition) to slightly soften the tone and register of your language.

Definition: Hedging refers to 'the act of expressing your attitude or ideas in tentative or cautious ways' (Singh and Lukkarila, 2017: 101). It’s mostly achieved through a number of verbs or adverbs, such as ‘suggest’ or ‘seemingly.’

Q: What’s the difference between the results and discussion?

A: The results chapter is a factual account of the data collected, whilst the discussion considers the implications of these findings by relating them to relevant literature and answering your research question(s). See the tab 'The Differences' in this guide for more detail.

Q: Should the discussion include recommendations for future research?

A: Your dissertation should include some recommendations for future research, but it can vary where it appears. Recommendations are often featured towards the end of the discussion chapter, but they also regularly appear in the conclusion chapter (see our Writing the Conclusion guide for more). It simply depends on your dissertation and the conventions of your school or department. It’s worth consulting any specific guidance that you’ve been given, or asking your supervisor directly.

Q: Should the discussion include the limitations of the study?

A: Like the answer above, you should engage with the limitations of your study, but it might appear in the discussion of some dissertations, or the conclusion of others. Consider the narrative flow and whether it makes sense to include the limitations in your discussion chapter, or your conclusion. You should also consult any discipline-specific guidance you’ve been given, or ask your supervisor for more. Be mindful that this is slightly different to the limitations outlined in the methodology or methods chapter (see our Writing the Methodology guide vs. the 'Discussion' tab of this guide).

Q: Should the results and discussion be in the first-person or third?

A: It’s important to be consistent , so you should use whatever you’ve been using throughout your dissertation. Third-person is more commonly accepted, but certain disciplines are happy with the use of first-person. Just remember that the first-person pronoun can be a distracting, but powerful device, so use it sparingly. Consult your lecturer for discipline-specific guidance.

Q: Is there a difference between the discussion and the conclusion of a dissertation?

A: Yes, there is a difference. The discussion chapter is a detailed consideration of how your findings answer your research questions. This includes the use of secondary literature to help contextualise your discussion. Rather than considering the findings in detail, the conclusion briefly summarises and synthesises the main findings of your study before bringing the dissertation to a close. Both are similar, particularly in the way they ‘broaden out’ to consider the wider implications of the research. They are, however, their own distinct chapters, unless otherwise stated by your supervisor.

The results and discussion chapters (or chapter) constitute a large part of your dissertation as it’s here where your original contribution is foregrounded and discussed in detail. Remember, the results chapter simply reports on the data collected, whilst the discussion is where you consider your research questions and/or hypothesis in more detail by interpreting and interrogating the data. You can integrate both into a single chapter and weave the interpretation of your findings throughout the chapter, although it’s common for both the results and discussion to appear as separate chapters. Consult your supervisor for further guidance.

Here’s a final checklist for writing your results and discussion. Remember that not all of these points will be relevant for you, so make sure you cover whatever’s appropriate for your dissertation. The asterisk (*) indicates any content that might not be relevant for your dissertation. To download a copy of the checklist to save and edit, please use the Word document, below.

Results and discussion self-evaluation checklist

<< Previous: The Methodology
Next: The Conclusion >>
Last Updated: Apr 19, 2024 12:38 PM
URL: https://library.soton.ac.uk/writing_the_dissertation

How it works

How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter – A Quick Guide with Examples

Published by Alvin Nicolas at August 12th, 2021 , Revised On September 20, 2023

Dissertation discussion is the chapter where you explore the relevance, significance, and meanings of your findings – allowing you to showcase your talents in describing and analyzing the results of your study.

Here, you will be expected to demonstrate how your research findings answer the research questions established or test the hypothesis .

The arguments you assert in the dissertation analysis and discussions chapter lay the foundations of your conclusion . It is critically important to discuss the results in a precise manner.

To help you understand how to write a dissertation discussion chapter, here is the list of the main elements of this section so you stay on the right track when writing:

Summary: Start by providing a summary of your key research findings
Interpretations: What is the significance of your findings?
Implications: Why are your findings important to academic and scientific communities, and what purpose would they serve?
Limitations: When and where will your results have no implications?
Future Recommendations : Advice for other researchers and scientists who explore the topic further in future.

The dissertation discussion chapter should be carefully drafted to ensure that the results mentioned in your research align with your research question, aims, and objectives.

Considering the importance of this chapter for all students working on their dissertations, we have comprehensive guidelines on how to write a dissertation discussion chapter.

The discussion and conclusion chapters often overlap. Depending on your university, you may be asked to group these two sections in one chapter – Discussion and Conclusion.

In some cases, the results and discussion are put together under the Results and Discussion chapter. Here are some dissertation examples of working out the best structure for your dissertation.

Alternatively, you can look for the required dissertation structure in your handbook or consult your supervisor.

Steps of How to Write Dissertation Discussion Chapter

1. provide a summary of your findings.

Start your discussion by summarising the key findings of your research questions. Avoid repeating the information you have already stated in the previous chapters.

You will be expected to clearly express your interpretation of results to answer the research questions established initially in one or two paragraphs.

Here are some examples of how to present the summary of your findings ;

“The data suggests that”,
“The results confirm that”,
“The analysis indicates that”,
“The research shows a relationship between”, etc.

2. Interpretations of Results

Your audience will expect you to provide meanings of the results, although they might seem obvious to you. The results and their interpretations should be linked to the research questions so the reader can understand the value your research has added to the literature.

There are many ways of interpreting the data, but your chosen approach to interpreting the data will depend on the type of research involved . Some of the most common strategies employed include;

Describing how and why you ended up with unexpected findings and explaining their importance in detail
Relating your findings with previous studies conducted
Explaining your position with logical arguments when/if any alternative explanations are suggested
An in-depth discussion around whether or not the findings answered your research questions and successfully tested the hypothesis

Examples of how you can start your interpretation in the Discussion chapter are –

“Findings of this study contradict those of Allen et al. (2014) that”,
“Contrary to the hypothesized association,” “Confirming the hypothesis…”,
“The findings confirm that A is….. even though Allen et al. (2014) and Michael (2012) suggested B was …..”

3. Implications of your Study

What practical and theoretical implications will your study have for other researchers and the scientific community as a whole?

It is vital to relate your results to the knowledge in the existing literature so the readers can establish how your research will contribute to the existing data.

When thinking of the possible consequences of your findings, you should ask yourself these;

Are your findings in line with previous studies? What contribution did your research make to them?
Why are your results entirely different from other studies on the same topic?
Did your findings approve or contradict existing knowledge?
What are the practical implications of your study?

Remember that as the researcher, you should aim to let your readers know why your study will contribute to the existing literature. Possible ways of starting this particular section are;

“The findings show that A….. whereas Lee (2017) and John (2013) suggested that B”, “The results of this study completely contradict the claims made in theories”,
“These results are not in line with the theoretical perspectives”,
“The statistical analysis provides a new understanding of the relationship between A and B”,
“Future studies should take into consideration the findings of this study because”

“Improve your work’s language, structure, style, and overall quality. Get help from our experienced dissertation editors to improve the quality of your paper to First Class Standard. Click here to learn more about our Dissertation, Editing, and Improvement Services .

Looking for dissertation help?

Researchprospect to the rescue, then.

We have expert writers on our team who are skilled at helping students with dissertations across various disciplines. Guaranteeing 100% satisfaction!

4. Recognise the Limitations of your Research

Almost every academic research has some limitations. Acknowledging them will only add to your credibility as a scientific researcher.

In addition to the possible human errors, it’s important to take into account other factors that might have influenced the results of your study, including but not limited to unexpected research obstacles, specific methodological choices , and the overall research design.

Avoid mentioning any limitations that may not be relevant to your research aim, but clearly state the limitations that may have affected your results.

For example, if you used a sample size that included a tiny population, you may not generalise your results.

Similarly, obstacles faced in collecting data from the participants can influence the findings of your study. Make a note of all such research limitations , but explain to the reader why your results are still authentic.

The small sample size limited the generalisability of the results.
The authenticity of the findings may have been influenced by….
The obstacles in collecting data resulted in…
It is beyond the framework of this research…

5. Provide Recommendations for Future Research

The limitations of your research work directly result in future recommendations. However, it should be noted that your recommendations for future research work should include the areas that your own work could not report so other researchers can build on them.

Sometimes the recommendations are a part of the conclusion chapter . Some examples;

More research is needed to be performed….

The Purpose of Dissertation Discussion Chapter

Remember that the discussion section of a dissertation is the heart of your research because a) it will indicate your stance on the topic of research, and b) it answers the research questions initially established in the Introduction chapter .

Every piece of information you present here will add value to the existing literature within your field of study. How you structured your findings in the preceding chapter will help you determine the best structure for your dissertation discussion section.

For example, it might be logical to structure your analysis/discussions by theme if you chose the pattern in your findings section.

But generally, discussion based on research questions is the more widely used structure in academia because this pattern clearly indicates how you have addressed the aim of your research.

Most UK universities require the supervisor or committee members to comment on the extent to which each research question has been answered. You will be doing them a great favour if you structure your discussion so that each research question is laid out separately.

Irrespective of whether you are writing an essay, dissertation, or chapter of a dissertation , all pieces of writing should start with an introduction .

Once your readers have read through your study results, you might want to highlight the contents of the subsequent discussion as an introduction paragraph (summary of your results – as explained above).

Likewise, the discussion chapter is expected to end with a concluding paragraph – allowing you the opportunity to summarise your interpretations.

The dissertation analysis & discussion chapter is usually very long, so it will make sense to emphasise the critical points in a concluding paragraph so the reader can grasp the essential information. This will also help to make sure the reader understands your analysis.

Also Read: Research Discussion Of Findings

Useful Tips

Presentation of graphs, tables, and figures.

In the 1990s and early 2000s, students spent days creating graphs and charts for their statistical analysis work . Thanks to technology, you can produce even more accurate graphs and figures today in a shorter period.

Using Microsoft Word, STATA, SPSS, Microsoft Excel and other statistical analysis software, we can now draw beautiful-looking figures, tables , and graphs with just a few clicks and make them appear in our document at the desired place. But there are downsides to being too dependent on technology.

Many students make the common mistake of using colours to represent variables when really they have to print their dissertation paper final copy in black and white.

Any colours on graphs and figures will eventually be viewed in the grayscale presentation. Recognizing different shades of grey on the same chart or graph can sometimes be a little confusing.

For example, green and purple appear as pretty much the same shade of grey on a line chat, meaning your chart will become unreadable to the marker.

Another trap you may fall into is the unintentional stuffing of the dissertation chapter with graphs and figures. Even though it is essential to show numbers and statistics, you don’t want to overwhelm your readers with too many.

It may not be necessary to have a graph/table under each sub-heading. Only you can best judge whether or not you need to have a graph/table under a particular sub-heading as the writer.

Image result for excel graphs and charts

Relating to Previous Chapters

As a student, it can be challenging to develop your own analysis and discussion of results. One of the excellent discussion chapter requirements is to showcase your ability to relate previous research to your research results.

Avoid repeating the same information over and over. Many students fall into this trap which negatively affects the mark of their overall dissertation paper .

Concise and to-the-point information will help you effectively convey your point to the readers.

Although you must demonstrate how your findings relate to previous research, it is equally important to ensure you are not simply rewriting what has already been said in the introduction and literature review chapters.

The best strategy is to use examples from previous sections to postulate an argument.

Hyperlinks are recommended to take the reader from one section to another. This is especially important for submitting electronic documents as .word or .pdf files. Hyperlinking is tedious and time-consuming, so you should allow for this in your dissertation timeline to avoid rushing in the closing stages.

Also read: How to Write the Abstract for the Dissertation.

Using Subsections and Subheadings

You might want to reflect on the structure of the discussion in your organizstion of the dissertation discussion chapter, and for that, you will need to create sub-sections.

It is essential to keep subsections to the point and as short as possible. Use a layer of subheadings if possible.

For example

Subsection 4.1 of Chapter 4- Discussion can be further divided into sections 4.1.1 and 4.2.2. After three numerical layers (4.1.1, 4.2.2, and 4.2.3), any subheadings need not appear in the contents table.

The titles of all subsections will appear on your table of contents so choose the wordings carefully. A title too long or too short might confuse the reader. A one or two-word subheading will not give the reader enough information to understand the section.

Likewise, using a research question or long sentences in the subheading is not recommended. It might help to examine how other researchers and writers create these subheadings.

Critical Thinking

Your critical thinking skills are the crux of your dissertation discussion chapter. You will do yourself a great disservice if you fail to put the critical thinking element into the equation.

After all, this exercise aims to showcase clarity in your thoughts and arguments. Markers of the dissertation give more importance to the analysis and discussion chapter. But you could be marked negatively if this particular chapter lacks critical thinking.

Many students struggle to distinguish between fundamental descriptive analysis and critical thinking with their opinions on the research topic.

Critical thinking is a skill developed over time, and it might be daunting for you to come to terms with the idea of critical thinking and its use in your analysis. But even if you are no expert, you must try your best.

“Still unsure about how to write a dissertation discussion chapter ? Why not take advantage of our UK-based dissertation writing service ? Your dissertation is essential to your degree, so you cannot risk failing it.

With our custom writing service , you are guaranteed to have all your dissertation paper elements put into the right place. Our expert academics can help you with your full dissertation paper or a part of it. Click here to learn more about our dissertation services.

Duplication of Content

Another critical error students make reaffirming the point the graph/chart was supposed to make. Writing out the same information as presented in the graph defeats the whole purpose of having them in the first place.

You will be expected to form your opinions and arguments based on the findings (as presented by the graphs), so keep an eye on this mistake. Finally, avoid simply inserting a graph without any explanation whatsoever.

It should be noted that there is no correct or incorrect number of charts/figures one can use in the dissertation findings and discussion chapter. A balance must be struck.

Avoid Over Interpretation

This is a major no-no when writing a dissertation discussion. Do not make an argument that isn’t backed by your collected data.

The results and interpretations that cannot be supported should not be mentioned. Your research will be deemed unauthentic and will also be questioned by your supervisor if you do so. Results should be interpreted without any bias.

How to Write the Findings of a Dissertation.

Do not Speculate

Speculation in the discussion chapter of your dissertation is discouraged. Your dissertation’s discussion is based on your collected data and how it relates to your research questions. Thus, speculating here will undoubtedly undermine your research’s credibility.

Also, try not to generalise your findings. If your research is based on a specific population, do not state that the same findings might apply in every case. As indicated previously, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations of your research.

On the other hand, if you think your discussion needs to address other populations as well, start your sentence like this ‘We speculate that..’ or ‘It is speculated that..’ This will keep you from getting into any trouble.

What are the elements of the Dissertation Discussion?

The list of the main elements of the discussion chapter are:

Implications : Why are your findings important to academic and scientific communities, and what purpose would they serve?
Future Recommendations: Advice for other researchers and scientists who explore the topic further in future.

What are the steps of writing a Dissertation Discussion Chapter?

Write a summary of the findings
Provide a summary of your findings
Interpretations of Results
Recognise the Limitations of your research
Provide Recommendations for Future Research.

Can we use graphs and charts in the Dissertation Discussion Chapter?

Yes, using graphs to aid your statistical results and enhance presentation is essential, but do not overwhelm it with a lot of graphs in multiple colours.

Guide on How to Write the Results Section of a Dissertation

The dissertation results chapter can be written once data has been collected and analyzed. In this section, the main findings of the research are reported and their relation to hypotheses or research questions are observed briefly. This chapter is among the most crucial parts of a study. It is here that statistical analysis is accurately performed, findings reported and explained, and assumptions examined. After this analysis, results are presented in a manner that shows non-support or support of the stated hypothesis.

Writing a thesis results section requires statistical expertise to present and defend the findings effectively. What’s more, the core findings should be presented logically without interpretation or bias from the writer. This section should set up the read for evaluation or interpretation of the findings in the discussion chapter .

When writing the thesis results chapter, the author should break down the findings into simple sentences. Essentially, this section should tell readers what the author found in the research.

What to Include in the Dissertation Results Chapter

The results chapter of a dissertation should include the core findings of a study. Essentially, only the findings of a specific study should be included in this section. These include:

Data presented in graphs, tables, charts, and figures
Data collection recruitment, collection, and/or participants
Secondary findings like subgroup analyses and secondary outcomes
Contextual data analysis and explanation of the meaning
Information that corresponds to research questions

It’s crucial to consider the scope of your research when writing up dissertation results. That’s because a study with many variables or a broader scope can yield different results. In that case, only the most relevant results should be stated. Any data that doesn’t present direct outcomes or findings of a study should not be included in this section.

What are the Five Chapters of a Dissertation?

Traditionally, a dissertation has five major chapters. The results section is one of the most important chapters because it summarizes and presents the collected and analyzed data. The major chapters of this paper are:

Introduction
Literature review
Methodology

The methodology section can vary depending on whether the author conducted qualitative research or quantitative research or a mixed study. However, the methodology section is also very important because the used methods can influence how the gathered results will be presented. For instance, you can use a questionnaire to gather information. If you don’t know how to analyze questionnaire results dissertation paper might not impress your readers. Therefore, choose your research methods wisely to make writing the findings or results section easier.

How to Write a Dissertation Results Chapter

Every research project is unique. As such, learners should not take a one-size-fits-all approach when writing results for a dissertation. The layout and content of this chapter should be determined by your research area, study design, and the chosen methodologies. Also, consider the target journal guidelines and editors.

But, when writing the results section dissertation authors can follow certain steps, especially for scientific studies. Those steps are as follows.

Check the Target Journal’s Instructions or GuidelinesDifferent journals outline the requirements, instructions, or guidelines that authors should follow when writing the findings or results section. A journal can also provide a dissertation results section example to guide authors. It’s crucial that you note the content length limitations, scope, and aims that the journal requires dissertation authors to consider.
Consider How Your Results Relate to the Catalogue and Requirements of the JournalConsider your findings or experimental results that are relevant to the research objectives or questions. Include even the findings that don’t support your hypothesis or are unexpected. Also, catalog the findings of your research using subheadings to clarify and streamline your report. That way, you can avoid peripheral and excessive details and make your findings easy to understand.It’s important to decide on the results structure. For instance, you can match the hypothesis or research questions to the results. You can also arrange them the way they are ordered in your Methods section. Alternatively, use the importance hierarchy or chronological order. Most importantly, consider your evidence, audience, and objectives of the study when deciding on the dissertation structure for the results section.
Design Tables and Figures for Illustrating Your DataNumber your figures and tables in the order that you use to mention them in main the paper text. Make sure that your figures have self-explanatory information. Also, include the necessary information, such as definitions in the design to make the findings data easy to understand. Essentially, readers should understand your tables and figures without reading the text.Additionally, make your figures and tables the focal point of this section. Ensure that they tell an informative and clear story about the study without repetition. However, always remember that figures should enhance and clarify your text, not replace it.

Checklist for the Results Chapter

Once you have written this section, go through it carefully to ensure the following:

All findings that are relevant to the research questions have been included.
Each result has been reported objectively and concisely, including relevant inferential statistics and descriptive statistics.
You have stated whether the study findings refuted or supported every hypothesis.
You have used figures and tables to illustrate your results appropriately.
All figures and tables are referred to and labeled correctly in the text.
The presented results do not include speculations or subjective interpretation

You may come across many tips on how to write the results section of a dissertation. However, the most important tip is to ensure that the results that you present in this section are relevant to your study questions or hypotheses. If this sounds too complicated, you can ask us “ do my thesis for me “, and we’ll take care of it. Anyways, you have to remember that relevance is the most important thing regardless of whether the results support or do not support the hypotheses. Also, decide on the order to use when presenting the results of your study. This is very important because it makes it easier for your readers to understand them. Including figures, tables, and graphs makes the information in this section easier to understand.

Dissertation Structure & Layout 101: How to structure your dissertation, thesis or research project.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) Reviewed By: David Phair (PhD) | July 2019

So, you’ve got a decent understanding of what a dissertation is , you’ve chosen your topic and hopefully you’ve received approval for your research proposal . Awesome! Now its time to start the actual dissertation or thesis writing journey.

To craft a high-quality document, the very first thing you need to understand is dissertation structure . In this post, we’ll walk you through the generic dissertation structure and layout, step by step. We’ll start with the big picture, and then zoom into each chapter to briefly discuss the core contents. If you’re just starting out on your research journey, you should start with this post, which covers the big-picture process of how to write a dissertation or thesis .

Dissertation structure and layout - the basics

The Caveat

In this post, we’ll be discussing a traditional dissertation/thesis structure and layout, which is generally used for social science research across universities, whether in the US, UK, Europe or Australia. However, some universities may have small variations on this structure (extra chapters, merged chapters, slightly different ordering, etc).

So, always check with your university if they have a prescribed structure or layout that they expect you to work with. If not, it’s safe to assume the structure we’ll discuss here is suitable. And even if they do have a prescribed structure, you’ll still get value from this post as we’ll explain the core contents of each section.

Overview: S tructuring a dissertation or thesis

Acknowledgements page
Abstract (or executive summary)
Table of contents , list of figures and tables
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Literature review
Chapter 3: Methodology
Chapter 4: Results
Chapter 5: Discussion
Chapter 6: Conclusion
Reference list

As I mentioned, some universities will have slight variations on this structure. For example, they want an additional “personal reflection chapter”, or they might prefer the results and discussion chapter to be merged into one. Regardless, the overarching flow will always be the same, as this flow reflects the research process , which we discussed here – i.e.:

The introduction chapter presents the core research question and aims .
The literature review chapter assesses what the current research says about this question.
The methodology, results and discussion chapters go about undertaking new research about this question.
The conclusion chapter (attempts to) answer the core research question .

In other words, the dissertation structure and layout reflect the research process of asking a well-defined question(s), investigating, and then answering the question – see below.

A dissertation's structure reflect the research process

To restate that – the structure and layout of a dissertation reflect the flow of the overall research process . This is essential to understand, as each chapter will make a lot more sense if you “get” this concept. If you’re not familiar with the research process, read this post before going further.

Right. Now that we’ve covered the big picture, let’s dive a little deeper into the details of each section and chapter. Oh and by the way, you can also grab our free dissertation/thesis template here to help speed things up.

The title page of your dissertation is the very first impression the marker will get of your work, so it pays to invest some time thinking about your title. But what makes for a good title? A strong title needs to be 3 things:

Succinct (not overly lengthy or verbose)
Specific (not vague or ambiguous)
Representative of the research you’re undertaking (clearly linked to your research questions)

Typically, a good title includes mention of the following:

The broader area of the research (i.e. the overarching topic)
The specific focus of your research (i.e. your specific context)
Indication of research design (e.g. quantitative , qualitative , or mixed methods ).

For example:

A quantitative investigation [research design] into the antecedents of organisational trust [broader area] in the UK retail forex trading market [specific context/area of focus].

Again, some universities may have specific requirements regarding the format and structure of the title, so it’s worth double-checking expectations with your institution (if there’s no mention in the brief or study material).

Acknowledgements

This page provides you with an opportunity to say thank you to those who helped you along your research journey. Generally, it’s optional (and won’t count towards your marks), but it is academic best practice to include this.

So, who do you say thanks to? Well, there’s no prescribed requirements, but it’s common to mention the following people:

Your dissertation supervisor or committee.
Any professors, lecturers or academics that helped you understand the topic or methodologies.
Any tutors, mentors or advisors.
Your family and friends, especially spouse (for adult learners studying part-time).

There’s no need for lengthy rambling. Just state who you’re thankful to and for what (e.g. thank you to my supervisor, John Doe, for his endless patience and attentiveness) – be sincere. In terms of length, you should keep this to a page or less.

Abstract or executive summary

The dissertation abstract (or executive summary for some degrees) serves to provide the first-time reader (and marker or moderator) with a big-picture view of your research project. It should give them an understanding of the key insights and findings from the research, without them needing to read the rest of the report – in other words, it should be able to stand alone .

For it to stand alone, your abstract should cover the following key points (at a minimum):

Your research questions and aims – what key question(s) did your research aim to answer?
Your methodology – how did you go about investigating the topic and finding answers to your research question(s)?
Your findings – following your own research, what did do you discover?
Your conclusions – based on your findings, what conclusions did you draw? What answers did you find to your research question(s)?

So, in much the same way the dissertation structure mimics the research process, your abstract or executive summary should reflect the research process, from the initial stage of asking the original question to the final stage of answering that question.

In practical terms, it’s a good idea to write this section up last , once all your core chapters are complete. Otherwise, you’ll end up writing and rewriting this section multiple times (just wasting time). For a step by step guide on how to write a strong executive summary, check out this post .

Need a helping hand?

This section is straightforward. You’ll typically present your table of contents (TOC) first, followed by the two lists – figures and tables. I recommend that you use Microsoft Word’s automatic table of contents generator to generate your TOC. If you’re not familiar with this functionality, the video below explains it simply:

If you find that your table of contents is overly lengthy, consider removing one level of depth. Oftentimes, this can be done without detracting from the usefulness of the TOC.

Right, now that the “admin” sections are out of the way, its time to move on to your core chapters. These chapters are the heart of your dissertation and are where you’ll earn the marks. The first chapter is the introduction chapter – as you would expect, this is the time to introduce your research…

It’s important to understand that even though you’ve provided an overview of your research in your abstract, your introduction needs to be written as if the reader has not read that (remember, the abstract is essentially a standalone document). So, your introduction chapter needs to start from the very beginning, and should address the following questions:

What will you be investigating (in plain-language, big picture-level)?
Why is that worth investigating? How is it important to academia or business? How is it sufficiently original?
What are your research aims and research question(s)? Note that the research questions can sometimes be presented at the end of the literature review (next chapter).
What is the scope of your study? In other words, what will and won’t you cover ?
How will you approach your research? In other words, what methodology will you adopt?
How will you structure your dissertation? What are the core chapters and what will you do in each of them?

These are just the bare basic requirements for your intro chapter. Some universities will want additional bells and whistles in the intro chapter, so be sure to carefully read your brief or consult your research supervisor.

If done right, your introduction chapter will set a clear direction for the rest of your dissertation. Specifically, it will make it clear to the reader (and marker) exactly what you’ll be investigating, why that’s important, and how you’ll be going about the investigation. Conversely, if your introduction chapter leaves a first-time reader wondering what exactly you’ll be researching, you’ve still got some work to do.

Now that you’ve set a clear direction with your introduction chapter, the next step is the literature review . In this section, you will analyse the existing research (typically academic journal articles and high-quality industry publications), with a view to understanding the following questions:

What does the literature currently say about the topic you’re investigating?
Is the literature lacking or well established? Is it divided or in disagreement?
How does your research fit into the bigger picture?
How does your research contribute something original?
How does the methodology of previous studies help you develop your own?

Depending on the nature of your study, you may also present a conceptual framework towards the end of your literature review, which you will then test in your actual research.

Again, some universities will want you to focus on some of these areas more than others, some will have additional or fewer requirements, and so on. Therefore, as always, its important to review your brief and/or discuss with your supervisor, so that you know exactly what’s expected of your literature review chapter.

Now that you’ve investigated the current state of knowledge in your literature review chapter and are familiar with the existing key theories, models and frameworks, its time to design your own research. Enter the methodology chapter – the most “science-ey” of the chapters…

In this chapter, you need to address two critical questions:

Exactly HOW will you carry out your research (i.e. what is your intended research design)?
Exactly WHY have you chosen to do things this way (i.e. how do you justify your design)?

Remember, the dissertation part of your degree is first and foremost about developing and demonstrating research skills . Therefore, the markers want to see that you know which methods to use, can clearly articulate why you’ve chosen then, and know how to deploy them effectively.

Importantly, this chapter requires detail – don’t hold back on the specifics. State exactly what you’ll be doing, with who, when, for how long, etc. Moreover, for every design choice you make, make sure you justify it.

In practice, you will likely end up coming back to this chapter once you’ve undertaken all your data collection and analysis, and revise it based on changes you made during the analysis phase. This is perfectly fine. Its natural for you to add an additional analysis technique, scrap an old one, etc based on where your data lead you. Of course, I’m talking about small changes here – not a fundamental switch from qualitative to quantitative, which will likely send your supervisor in a spin!

You’ve now collected your data and undertaken your analysis, whether qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods. In this chapter, you’ll present the raw results of your analysis . For example, in the case of a quant study, you’ll present the demographic data, descriptive statistics, inferential statistics , etc.

Typically, Chapter 4 is simply a presentation and description of the data, not a discussion of the meaning of the data. In other words, it’s descriptive, rather than analytical – the meaning is discussed in Chapter 5. However, some universities will want you to combine chapters 4 and 5, so that you both present and interpret the meaning of the data at the same time. Check with your institution what their preference is.

Now that you’ve presented the data analysis results, its time to interpret and analyse them. In other words, its time to discuss what they mean, especially in relation to your research question(s).

What you discuss here will depend largely on your chosen methodology. For example, if you’ve gone the quantitative route, you might discuss the relationships between variables . If you’ve gone the qualitative route, you might discuss key themes and the meanings thereof. It all depends on what your research design choices were.

Most importantly, you need to discuss your results in relation to your research questions and aims, as well as the existing literature. What do the results tell you about your research questions? Are they aligned with the existing research or at odds? If so, why might this be? Dig deep into your findings and explain what the findings suggest, in plain English.

The final chapter – you’ve made it! Now that you’ve discussed your interpretation of the results, its time to bring it back to the beginning with the conclusion chapter . In other words, its time to (attempt to) answer your original research question s (from way back in chapter 1). Clearly state what your conclusions are in terms of your research questions. This might feel a bit repetitive, as you would have touched on this in the previous chapter, but its important to bring the discussion full circle and explicitly state your answer(s) to the research question(s).

Next, you’ll typically discuss the implications of your findings? In other words, you’ve answered your research questions – but what does this mean for the real world (or even for academia)? What should now be done differently, given the new insight you’ve generated?

Lastly, you should discuss the limitations of your research, as well as what this means for future research in the area. No study is perfect, especially not a Masters-level. Discuss the shortcomings of your research. Perhaps your methodology was limited, perhaps your sample size was small or not representative, etc, etc. Don’t be afraid to critique your work – the markers want to see that you can identify the limitations of your work. This is a strength, not a weakness. Be brutal!

This marks the end of your core chapters – woohoo! From here on out, it’s pretty smooth sailing.

The reference list is straightforward. It should contain a list of all resources cited in your dissertation, in the required format, e.g. APA , Harvard, etc.

It’s essential that you use reference management software for your dissertation. Do NOT try handle your referencing manually – its far too error prone. On a reference list of multiple pages, you’re going to make mistake. To this end, I suggest considering either Mendeley or Zotero. Both are free and provide a very straightforward interface to ensure that your referencing is 100% on point. I’ve included a simple how-to video for the Mendeley software (my personal favourite) below:

Some universities may ask you to include a bibliography, as opposed to a reference list. These two things are not the same . A bibliography is similar to a reference list, except that it also includes resources which informed your thinking but were not directly cited in your dissertation. So, double-check your brief and make sure you use the right one.

The very last piece of the puzzle is the appendix or set of appendices. This is where you’ll include any supporting data and evidence. Importantly, supporting is the keyword here.

Your appendices should provide additional “nice to know”, depth-adding information, which is not critical to the core analysis. Appendices should not be used as a way to cut down word count (see this post which covers how to reduce word count ). In other words, don’t place content that is critical to the core analysis here, just to save word count. You will not earn marks on any content in the appendices, so don’t try to play the system!

Time to recap…

And there you have it – the traditional dissertation structure and layout, from A-Z. To recap, the core structure for a dissertation or thesis is (typically) as follows:

Acknowledgments page

Most importantly, the core chapters should reflect the research process (asking, investigating and answering your research question). Moreover, the research question(s) should form the golden thread throughout your dissertation structure. Everything should revolve around the research questions, and as you’ve seen, they should form both the start point (i.e. introduction chapter) and the endpoint (i.e. conclusion chapter).

I hope this post has provided you with clarity about the traditional dissertation/thesis structure and layout. If you have any questions or comments, please leave a comment below, or feel free to get in touch with us. Also, be sure to check out the rest of the Grad Coach Blog .

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

36 Comments

many thanks i found it very useful

Glad to hear that, Arun. Good luck writing your dissertation.

Such clear practical logical advice. I very much needed to read this to keep me focused in stead of fretting.. Perfect now ready to start my research!

what about scientific fields like computer or engineering thesis what is the difference in the structure? thank you very much

Thanks so much this helped me a lot!

Very helpful and accessible. What I like most is how practical the advice is along with helpful tools/ links.

Thanks Ade!

Thank you so much sir.. It was really helpful..

You’re welcome!

Hi! How many words maximum should contain the abstract?

Thank you so much 😊 Find this at the right moment

You’re most welcome. Good luck with your dissertation.

best ever benefit i got on right time thank you

Many times Clarity and vision of destination of dissertation is what makes the difference between good ,average and great researchers the same way a great automobile driver is fast with clarity of address and Clear weather conditions .

I guess Great researcher = great ideas + knowledge + great and fast data collection and modeling + great writing + high clarity on all these

You have given immense clarity from start to end.

Morning. Where will I write the definitions of what I’m referring to in my report?

Thank you so much Derek, I was almost lost! Thanks a tonnnn! Have a great day!

Thanks ! so concise and valuable

This was very helpful. Clear and concise. I know exactly what to do now.

Thank you for allowing me to go through briefly. I hope to find time to continue.

Really useful to me. Thanks a thousand times

Very interesting! It will definitely set me and many more for success. highly recommended.

Thank you soo much sir, for the opportunity to express my skills

Usefull, thanks a lot. Really clear

Very nice and easy to understand. Thank you .

That was incredibly useful. Thanks Grad Coach Crew!

My stress level just dropped at least 15 points after watching this. Just starting my thesis for my grad program and I feel a lot more capable now! Thanks for such a clear and helpful video, Emma and the GradCoach team!

Do we need to mention the number of words the dissertation contains in the main document?

It depends on your university’s requirements, so it would be best to check with them 🙂

Such a helpful post to help me get started with structuring my masters dissertation, thank you!

Great video; I appreciate that helpful information

It is so necessary or avital course

This blog is very informative for my research. Thank you

Doctoral students are required to fill out the National Research Council’s Survey of Earned Doctorates

wow this is an amazing gain in my life

This is so good

How can i arrange my specific objectives in my dissertation?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

What Is A Literature Review (In A Dissertation Or Thesis) - Grad Coach - […] is to write the actual literature review chapter (this is usually the second chapter in a typical dissertation or…

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Print Friendly

File(s) under embargo

until file(s) become available

INTEGRATION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND HUMAN FACTORS IN MOBILE WORK ZONES AND ROUNDABOUTS FOR SAFETY AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING

The transportation system is facing serious safety concerns at work zones and intersections, which are two major areas where accidents and fatalities occur. In addition, slow improvement in transportation industry workers’ performance is also a bottleneck to overall productivity. This dissertation aims to integrate artificial intelligence and human factors to improve the safety of mobile work zones and unsignalized intersections and monitor real-time worker’s performance.

To improve work zone safety, the Autonomous Truck Mounted Attenuator (ATMA) technology is explored with support from the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT). The ATMA can be driven automatically which removes drivers from the TMA truck to improve their safety. In this study, the ATMA system was tested under four mobile work zone operations, including trash pickup, crack sealing, Raised Pavement Marking (RPM) inspection, and drainage inspection with several roadway types, including interstate, trunk highway, and state road. During the testing, video, motion, and physiological data from the workers is collected. The data is used to develop models for transportation construction workers’ activity classification and physical fatigue level monitoring using various machine learning techniques. In addition, workers’ perception of the ATMA system is collected by a survey and the results found that more training or exposure to the ATMA system improved their evaluation of the system.

To improve unsignalized intersection safety, an in-vehicle warning system is developed and evaluated under various levels of aggressive vehicle behaviors across different warning conditions through a driving simulator study. A customized driving simulator is developed to support human driving experiment, which integrates SUMO and Webots. A real-world roundabout is built and calibrated in the simulator and both driving performance and eye movement data are collected from the experiments. The results indicate that advanced warnings can effectively influence vehicle speed, steering wheel control, and drivers’ attention on different areas of interests (AOIs). It is found that a proper warning time is critical to improve drivers’ safety and comfort. Gender differences are also identified from both types of data. Interestingly, although male drivers and female drivers demonstrate different driving behaviors, their safety performance in terms of minimum time to collision (TTC) is similar. Finally, to better facilitate the design of the advanced warning systems, two machine learning models are developed to predict minimum TTC and classify drivers’ perceived risk.

The contributions of this dissertation are summarized from the following four perspectives. First, this dissertation contributes to the body of knowledge by using a Deep Learning (DL)-based model for mobile work zone workers’ activity classification. The dissertation also innovatively integrates domain knowledge to refine the DL-based model’s performance. Second, this dissertation advances the application of feature-level data fusion in monitoring transportation construction workers. Specifically, the feature-level data fusion between kinematic and physiological data is found effective in improving model accuracy. Third, to improve mobile work zone safety, the ATMA system is tested with various road maintenance activities. This is the first ATMA test with a focus on mobile work zone operations with human workers working on the ground. The testing results are valuable for the future ATMA design and implementation. Fourth, this dissertation discloses the positive impacts of in-vehicle warning systems in roundabout merging scenarios. Furthermore, a customized driving simulator is developed to support human driving simulation experiments and is open-sourced for public use.

Degree Type

Doctor of Philosophy
Construction Management Technology

Campus location

West Lafayette

Advisor/Supervisor/Committee Chair

Advisor/supervisor/committee co-chair, additional committee member 2, additional committee member 3, usage metrics.

Construction engineering
Transport engineering

- Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

Access provided by Google Indexer
My email alerts
BMA member login
Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

Advanced search
Search responses
Search blogs
Efficacy of psilocybin...

Efficacy of psilocybin for treating symptoms of depression: systematic review and meta-analysis

Linked editorial.

Psilocybin for depression

Related content
Peer review
Athina-Marina Metaxa , masters graduate researcher 1 ,
Mike Clarke , professor 2
1 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, UK
2 Northern Ireland Methodology Hub, Centre for Public Health, ICS-A Royal Hospitals, Belfast, Ireland, UK
Correspondence to: A-M Metaxa athina.metaxa{at}hmc.ox.ac.uk (or @Athina_Metaxa12 on X)
Accepted 6 March 2024

Objective To determine the efficacy of psilocybin as an antidepressant compared with placebo or non-psychoactive drugs.

Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources Five electronic databases of published literature (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index and Conference Proceedings Citation Index, and PsycInfo) and four databases of unpublished and international literature (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, and PsycEXTRA), and handsearching of reference lists, conference proceedings, and abstracts.

Data synthesis and study quality Information on potential treatment effect moderators was extracted, including depression type (primary or secondary), previous use of psychedelics, psilocybin dosage, type of outcome measure (clinician rated or self-reported), and personal characteristics (eg, age, sex). Data were synthesised using a random effects meta-analysis model, and observed heterogeneity and the effect of covariates were investigated with subgroup analyses and metaregression. Hedges’ g was used as a measure of treatment effect size, to account for small sample effects and substantial differences between the included studies’ sample sizes. Study quality was appraised using Cochrane’s Risk of Bias 2 tool, and the quality of the aggregated evidence was evaluated using GRADE guidelines.

Eligibility criteria Randomised trials in which psilocybin was administered as a standalone treatment for adults with clinically significant symptoms of depression and change in symptoms was measured using a validated clinician rated or self-report scale. Studies with directive psychotherapy were included if the psychotherapeutic component was present in both experimental and control conditions. Participants with depression regardless of comorbidities (eg, cancer) were eligible.

Results Meta-analysis on 436 participants (228 female participants), average age 36-60 years, from seven of the nine included studies showed a significant benefit of psilocybin (Hedges’ g=1.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 2.73, P<0.001) on change in depression scores compared with comparator treatment. Subgroup analyses and metaregressions indicated that having secondary depression (Hedges’ g=3.25, 95% CI 0.97 to 5.53), being assessed with self-report depression scales such as the Beck depression inventory (3.25, 0.97 to 5.53), and older age and previous use of psychedelics (metaregression coefficient 0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.24 and 4.2, 1.5 to 6.9, respectively) were correlated with greater improvements in symptoms. All studies had a low risk of bias, but the change from baseline metric was associated with high heterogeneity and a statistically significant risk of small study bias, resulting in a low certainty of evidence rating.

Conclusion Treatment effects of psilocybin were significantly larger among patients with secondary depression, when self-report scales were used to measure symptoms of depression, and when participants had previously used psychedelics. Further research is thus required to delineate the influence of expectancy effects, moderating factors, and treatment delivery on the efficacy of psilocybin as an antidepressant.

Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42023388065.

Download figure
Open in new tab
Download powerpoint

Introduction

Depression affects an estimated 300 million people around the world, an increase of nearly 20% over the past decade. 1 Worldwide, depression is also the leading cause of disability. 2

Drugs for depression are widely available but these seem to have limited efficacy, can have serious adverse effects, and are associated with low patient adherence. 3 4 Importantly, the treatment effects of antidepressant drugs do not appear until 4-7 weeks after the start of treatment, and remission of symptoms can take months. 4 5 Additionally, the likelihood of relapse is high, with 40-60% of people with depression experiencing a further depressive episode, and the chance of relapse increasing with each subsequent episode. 6 7

Since the early 2000s, the naturally occurring serotonergic hallucinogen psilocybin, found in several species of mushrooms, has been widely discussed as a potential treatment for depression. 8 9 Psilocybin’s mechanism of action differs from that of classic selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and might improve the treatment response rate, decrease time to improvement of symptoms, and prevent relapse post-remission. Moreover, more recent assessments of harm have consistently reported that psilocybin generally has low addictive potential and toxicity and that it can be administered safely under clinical supervision. 10

The renewed interest in psilocybin’s antidepressive effects led to several clinical trials on treatment resistant depression, 11 12 major depressive disorder, 13 and depression related to physical illness. 14 15 16 17 These trials mostly reported positive efficacy findings, showing reductions in symptoms of depression within a few hours to a few days after one dose or two doses of psilocybin. 11 12 13 16 17 18 These studies reported only minimal adverse effects, however, and drug harm assessments in healthy volunteers indicated that psilocybin does not induce physiological toxicity, is not addictive, and does not lead to withdrawal. 19 20 Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted with caution owing to the small sample sizes and open label design of some of these studies. 11 21

Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses since the early 2000s have investigated the use of psilocybin to treat symptoms of depression. Most found encouraging results, but as well as people with depression some included healthy volunteers, 22 and most combined data from studies of multiple serotonergic psychedelics, 23 24 25 even though each compound has unique neurobiological effects and mechanisms of action. 26 27 28 Furthermore, many systematic reviews included non-randomised studies and studies in which psilocybin was tested in conjunction with psychotherapeutic interventions, 25 29 30 31 32 which made it difficult to distinguish psilocybin’s treatment effects. Most systematic reviews and meta-analyses did not consider the impact of factors that could act as moderators to psilocybin’s effects, such as type of depression (primary or secondary), previous use of psychedelics, psilocybin dosage, type of outcome measure (clinician rated or self-reported), and personal characteristics (eg, age, sex). 25 26 29 30 31 32 Lastly, systematic reviews did not consider grey literature, 33 34 which might have led to a substantial overestimation of psilocybin’s efficacy as a treatment for depression. In this review we focused on randomised trials that contained an unconfounded evaluation of psilocybin in adults with symptoms of depression, regardless of country and language of publication.

In this systematic review and meta-analysis of indexed and non-indexed randomised trials we investigated the efficacy of psilocybin to treat symptoms of depression compared with placebo or non-psychoactive drugs. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (see supplementary Appendix A). The study overall did not deviate from the pre-registered protocol; one clarification was made to highlight that any non-psychedelic comparator was eligible for inclusion, including placebo, niacin, micro doses of psychedelics, and drugs that are considered the standard of care in depression (eg, SSRIs).

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Double blind and open label randomised trials with a crossover or parallel design were eligible for inclusion. We considered only studies in humans and with a control condition, which could include any type of non -active comparator, such as placebo, niacin, or micro doses of psychedelics.

Eligible studies were those that included adults (≥18 years) with clinically significant symptoms of depression, evaluated using a clinically validated tool for depression and mood disorder outcomes. Such tools included the Beck depression inventory, Hamilton depression rating scale, Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale, profile of mood states, and quick inventory of depressive symptomatology. Studies of participants with symptoms of depression and comorbidities (eg, cancer) were also eligible. We excluded studies of healthy participants (without depressive symptomatology).

Eligible studies investigated the effect of psilocybin as a standalone treatment on symptoms of depression. Studies with an active psilocybin condition that involved micro dosing (ie, psilocybin <100 μg/kg, according to the commonly accepted convention 22 35 ) were excluded. We included studies with directive psychotherapy if the psychotherapeutic component was present in both the experimental and the control conditions, so that the effects of psilocybin could be distinguished from those of psychotherapy. Studies involving group therapy were also excluded. Any non-psychedelic comparator was eligible for inclusion, including placebo, niacin, and micro doses of psychedelics.

Changes in symptoms, measured by validated clinician rated or self-report scales, such as the Beck depression inventory, Hamilton depression rating scale, Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale, profile of mood states, and quick inventory of depressive symptomatology were considered. We excluded outcomes that were measured less than three hours after psilocybin had been administered because any reported changes could be attributed to the transient cognitive and affective effects of the substance being administered. Aside from this, outcomes were included irrespective of the time point at which measurements were taken.

Search strategy

We searched major electronic databases and trial registries of psychological and medical research, with no limits on the publication date. Databases were the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials via the Cochrane Library, Embase via Ovid, Medline via Ovid, Science Citation Index and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science via Web of Science, and PsycInfo via Ovid. A search through multiple databases was necessary because each database includes unique journals. Supplementary Appendix B shows the search syntax used for the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, which was slightly modified to comply with the syntactic rules of the other databases.

Unpublished and grey literature were sought through registries of past and ongoing trials, databases of conference proceedings, government reports, theses, dissertations, and grant registries (eg, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, and PsycEXTRA). The references and bibliographies of eligible studies were checked for relevant publications. The original search was done in January 2023 and updated search was performed on 10 August 2023.

Data collection, extraction, and management

The results of the literature search were imported to the Endnote X9 reference management software, and the references were imported to the Covidence platform after removal of duplicates. Two reviewers (AM and DT) independently screened the title and abstract of each reference and then screened the full text of potentially eligible references. Any disagreements about eligibility were resolved through discussion. If information was insufficient to determine eligibility, the study’s authors were contacted. The reviewers were not blinded to the studies’ authors, institutions, or journal of publication.

The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flow diagram shows the study selection process and reasons for excluding studies that were considered eligible for full text screening. 36

Critical appraisal of individual studies and of aggregated evidence

The methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool (RoB 2) for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. 37 In addition to the criteria specified by RoB 2, we considered the potential impact of industry funding and conflicts of interest. The overall methodological quality of the aggregated evidence was evaluated using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). 38

If we found evidence of heterogeneity among the trials, then small study biases, such as publication bias, were assessed using a funnel plot and asymmetry tests (eg, Egger’s test). 39

We used a template for data extraction (see supplementary Appendix C) and summarised the extracted data in tabular form, outlining personal characteristics (age, sex, previous use of psychedelics), methodology (study design, dosage), and outcome related characteristics (mean change from baseline score on a depression questionnaire, response rates, and remission rates) of the included studies. Response conventionally refers to a 50% decrease in symptom severity based on scores on a depression rating scale, whereas remission scores are specific to a questionnaire (eg, score of ≤5 on the quick inventory of depressive symptomatology, score of ≤10 on the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale, 50% or greater reduction in symptoms, score of ≤7 on the Hamilton depression rating scale, or score of ≤12 on the Beck depression inventory). Across depression scales, higher scores signify more severe symptoms of depression.

Continuous data synthesis

From each study we extracted the baseline and post-intervention means and standard deviations (SDs) of the scores between comparison groups for the depression questionnaires and calculated the mean differences and SDs of change. If means and SDs were not available for the included studies, we extracted the values from available graphs and charts using the Web Plot Digitizer application ( https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer/ ). If it was not possible to calculate SDs from the graphs or charts, we generated values by converting standard errors (SEs) or confidence intervals (CIs), depending on availability, using formulas in the Cochrane Handbook (section 7.7.3.2). 40

Standardised mean differences were calculated for each study. We chose these rather than weighted mean differences because, although all the studies measured depression as the primary outcome, they did so with different questionnaires that score depression based on slightly different items. 41 If we had used weighted mean differences, any variability among studies would be assumed to reflect actual methodological or population differences and not differences in how the outcome was measured, which could be misleading. 40

The Hedges’ g effect size estimate was used because it tends to produce less biased results for studies with smaller samples (<20 participants) and when sample sizes differ substantially between studies, in contrast with Cohen’s d. 42 According to the Cochrane Handbook, the Hedges’ g effect size measure is synonymous with the standardised mean difference, 40 and the terms may be used interchangeably. Thus, a Hedges’ g of 0.2, 0.5, 0.8, or 1.2 corresponds to a small, medium, large, or very large effect, respectively. 40

Owing to variation in the participants’ personal characteristics, psilocybin dosage, type of depression investigated (primary or secondary), and type of comparators, we used a random effects model with a Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman modification. 43 This model also allowed for heterogeneity and within study variability to be incorporated into the weighting of the results of the included studies. 44 Lastly, this model could help to generalise the findings beyond the studies and patient populations included, making the meta-analysis more clinically useful. 45 We chose the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment in favour of more widely used random effects models (eg, DerSimonian and Laird) because it allows for better control of type 1 errors, especially for studies with smaller samples, and provides a better estimation of between study variance by accounting for small sample sizes. 46 47

For studies in which multiple treatment groups were compared with a single placebo group, we split the placebo group to avoid multiplicity. 48 Similarly, if studies included multiple primary outcomes (eg, change in depression at three weeks and at six weeks), we split the treatment groups to account for overlapping participants. 40

Prediction intervals (PIs) were calculated and reported to show the expected effect range of a similar future study, in a different setting. In a random effects model, within study measures of variability, such as CIs, can only show the range in which the average effect size could lie, but they are not informative about the range of potential treatment effects given the heterogeneity between studies. 49 Thus, we used PIs as an indication of variation between studies.

Heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis

Statistical heterogeneity was tested using the χ 2 test (significance level P<0.1) and I 2 statistic, and heterogeneity among included studies was evaluated visually and displayed graphically using a forest plot. If substantial or considerable heterogeneity was found (I 2 ≥50% or P<0.1), 50 we considered the study design and characteristics of the included studies. Sources of heterogeneity were explored by subgroup analysis, and the potential effects on the results are discussed.

Planned sensitivity analyses to assess the effect of unpublished studies and studies at high risk of bias were not done because all included studies had been published and none were assessed as high risk of bias. Exclusion sensitivity plots were used to display graphically the impact of individual studies and to determine which studies had a particularly large influence on the results of the meta-analysis. All sensitivity analyses were carried out with Stata 16 software.

Subgroup analysis

To reduce the risk of errors caused by multiplicity and to avoid data fishing, we planned subgroup analyses a priori and limited to: (1) patient characteristics, including age and sex; (2) comorbidities, such as a serious physical condition (previous research indicates that the effects of psilocybin may be less strong for such participants, compared with participants with no comorbidities) 33 ; (3) number of doses and amount of psilocybin administered, because some previous meta-analyses found that a higher number of doses and a higher dose of psilocybin both predicted a greater reduction in symptoms of depression, 34 whereas others reported the opposite 33 ; (4) psilocybin administered alongside psychotherapeutic guidance or as a standalone treatment; (5) severity of depressive symptoms (clinical v subclinical symptomatology); (6) clinician versus patient rated scales; and (7) high versus low quality studies, as determined by RoB 2 assessment scores.

Metaregression

Given that enough studies were identified (≥10 distinct observations according to the Cochrane Handbook’s suggestion 40 ), we performed metaregression to investigate whether covariates, or potential effect modifiers, explained any of the statistical heterogeneity. The metaregression analysis was carried out using Stata 16 software.

Random effects metaregression analyses were used to determine whether continuous variables such as participants’ age, percentage of female participants, and percentage of participants who had previously used psychedelics modified the effect estimate, all of which have been implicated in differentially affecting the efficacy of psychedelics in modifying mood. 51 We chose this approach in favour of converting these continuous variables into categorical variables and conducting subgroup analyses for two primary reasons; firstly, the loss of any data and subsequent loss of statistical power would increase the risk of spurious significant associations, 51 and, secondly, no cut-offs have been agreed for these factors in literature on psychedelic interventions for mood disorders, 52 making any such divisions arbitrary and difficult to reconcile with the findings of other studies. The analyses were based on within study averages, in the absence of individual data points for each participant, with the potential for the results to be affected by aggregate bias, compromising their validity and generalisability. 53 Furthermore, a group level analysis may not be able to detect distinct interactions between the effect modifiers and participant subgroups, resulting in ecological bias. 54 As a result, this analysis should be considered exploratory.

Sensitivity analysis

A sensitivity analysis was performed to determine if choice of analysis method affected the primary findings of meta-analysis. Specifically, we reanalysed the data on change in depression score using a random effects Dersimonian and Laird model without the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman modification and compared the results with those of the originally used model. This comparison is particularly important in the presence of substantial heterogeneity and the potential of small study effects to influence the intervention effect estimate. 55

Patient and public involvement

Research on novel depression treatments is of great interest to both patients and the public. Although patients and members of the public were not directly involved in the planning or writing of this manuscript owing to a lack of available funding for recruitment and researcher training, patients and members of the public read the manuscript after submission.

Figure 1 presents the flow of studies through the systematic review and meta-analysis. 56 A total of 4884 titles were retrieved from the five databases of published literature, and a further 368 titles were identified from the databases of unpublished and international literature in February 2023. After the removal of duplicate records, we screened the abstracts and titles of 875 reports. A further 12 studies were added after handsearching of reference lists and conference proceedings and abstracts. Overall, nine studies totalling 436 participants were eligible. The average age of the participants ranged from 36-60 years. During an updated search on 10 August 2023, no further studies were identified.

Flow of studies in systematic review and meta-analysis

After screening of the title and abstract, 61 titles remained for full text review. Native speakers helped to translate papers in languages other than English. The most common reasons for exclusion were the inclusion of healthy volunteers, absence of control groups, and use of a survey based design rather than an experimental design. After full text screening, nine studies were eligible for inclusion, and 15 clinical trials prospectively registered or underway as of August 2023 were noted for potential future inclusion in an update of this review (see supplementary Appendix D).

We sent requests for further information to the authors of studies by Griffiths et al, 57 Barrett, 58 and Benville et al, 59 because these studies appeared to meet the inclusion criteria but were only provided as summary abstracts online. A potentially eligible poster presentation from the 58th annual meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology was identified but the lead author (Griffiths) clarified that all information from the presentation was included in the studies by Davis et al 13 and Gukasyan et al 60 ; both of which we had already deemed ineligible.

Barrett 58 reported the effects of psilocybin on the cognitive flexibility and verbal reasoning of a subset of patients with major depressive disorder from Griffith et al’s trial, 61 compared with a waitlist group, but when contacted, Barrett explained that the results were published in the study by Doss et al, 62 which we had already screened and judged ineligible (see supplementary Appendix E). Benville et al’s study 59 presented a follow-up of Ross et al’s study 17 on a subset of patients with cancer and high suicidal ideation and desire for hastened death at baseline. Measures of antidepressant effects of psilocybin treatment compared with niacin were taken before and after treatment crossover, but detailed results are not reported. Table 1 describes the characteristics of the included studies and table 2 lists the main findings of the studies.

Characteristics of included studies

View inline

Main findings of included studies

Side effects and adverse events

Side effects reported in the included studies were minor and transient (eg, short term increases in blood pressure, headache, and anxiety), and none were coded as serious. Cahart-Harris et al noted one instance of abnormal dreams and insomnia. 63 This side effect profile is consistent with findings from other meta-analyses. 30 68 Owing to the different scales and methods used to catalogue side effects and adverse events across trials, it was not possible to combine these data quantitatively (see supplementary Appendix F).

Risk of bias

The Cochrane RoB 2 tools were used to evaluate the included studies ( table 3 ). RoB 2 for randomised trials was used for the five reports of parallel randomised trials (Carhart-Harris et al 63 and its secondary analysis Barba et al, 64 Goodwin et al 18 and its secondary analysis Goodwin et al, 65 and von Rotz et al 66 ) and RoB 2 for crossover trials was used for the four reports of crossover randomised trials (Griffiths et al, 14 Grob et al, 15 and Ross et al 17 and its follow-up Ross et al 67 ). Supplementary Appendix G provides a detailed explanation of the assessment of the included studies.

Summary risk of bias assessment of included studies, based on domains in Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool

Quality of included studies

Confidence in the quality of the evidence for the meta-analysis was assessed using GRADE, 38 through the GRADEpro GDT software program. Figure 2 shows the results of this assessment, along with our summary of findings.

GRADE assessment outputs for outcomes investigated in meta-analysis (change in depression scores and response and remission rates). The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). BDI=Beck depression inventory; CI=confidence interval; GRADE=Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation; HADS-D=hospital anxiety and depression scale; HAM-D=Hamilton depression rating scale; MADRS=Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale; QIDS=quick inventory of depressive symptomatology; RCT=randomised controlled trial; SD=standard deviation

Meta-analyses

Continuous data, change in depression scores —Using a Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman modified random effects meta-analysis, change in depression scores was significantly greater after treatment with psilocybin compared with active placebo. The overall Hedges’ g (1.64, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.73) indicated a large effect size favouring psilocybin ( fig 3 ). PIs were, however, wide and crossed the line of no difference (95% CI −1.72 to 5.03), indicating that there could be settings or populations in which psilocybin intervention would be less efficacious.

Forest plot for overall change in depression scores from before to after treatment. CI=confidence interval; DL=DerSimonian and Laird; HKSJ=Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman

Exploring publication bias in continuous data —We used Egger’s test and a funnel plot to examine the possibility of small study biases, such as publication bias. Statistical significance of Egger’s test for small study effects, along with the asymmetry in the funnel plot ( fig 4 ), indicates the presence of bias against smaller studies with non-significant results, suggesting that the pooled intervention effect estimate is likely to be overestimated. 69 An alternative explanation, however, is that smaller studies conducted at the early stages of a new psychotherapeutic intervention tend to include more high risk or responsive participants, and psychotherapeutic interventions tend to be delivered more effectively in smaller trials; both of these factors can exaggerate treatment effects, resulting in funnel plot asymmetry. 70 Also, because of the relatively small number of included studies and the considerable heterogeneity observed, test power may be insufficient to distinguish real asymmetry from chance. 71 Thus, this analysis should be considered exploratory.

Funnel plot assessing publication bias among studies measuring change in depression scores from before to after treatment. CI=confidence interval; θ IV =estimated effect size under inverse variance random effects model

Dichotomous data

We extracted response and remission rates for each group when reported directly, or imputed information when presented graphically. Two studies did not measure response or remission and thus did not contribute data for this part of the analysis. 15 18 The random effects model with a Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman modification was used to allow for heterogeneity to be incorporated into the weighting of the included studies’ results, and to provide a better estimation of between study variance accounting for small sample sizes.

Response rate —Overall, the likelihood of psilocybin intervention leading to treatment response was about two times greater (risk ratio 2.02, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.07) than with placebo. Despite the use of different scales to measure response, the heterogeneity between studies was not significant (I 2 =25.7%, P=0.23). PIs were, however, wide and crossed the line of no difference (−0.94 to 3.88), indicating that there could be settings or populations in which psilocybin intervention would be less efficacious.

Remission rate —Overall, the likelihood of psilocybin intervention leading to remission of depression was nearly three times greater than with placebo (risk ratio 2.71, 95% CI 1.75 to 4.20). Despite the use of different scales to measure response, no statistical heterogeneity was found between studies (I 2 =0.0%, P=0.53). PIs were, however, wide and crossed the line of no difference (0.87 to 2.32), indicating that there could be settings or populations in which psilocybin intervention would be less efficacious.

Exploring publication bias in response and remission rates data —We used Egger’s test and a funnel plot to examine whether response and remission estimates were affected by small study biases. The result for Egger’s test was non-significant (P>0.05) for both response and remission estimates, and no substantial asymmetry was observed in the funnel plots, providing no indication for the presence of bias against smaller studies with non-significant results.

Heterogeneity: subgroup analyses and metaregression

Heterogeneity was considerable across studies exploring changes in depression scores (I 2 =89.7%, P<0.005), triggering subgroup analyses to explore contributory factors. Table 4 and table 5 present the results of the heterogeneity analyses (subgroup analyses and metaregression, respectively). Also see supplementary Appendix H for a more detailed description and graphical representation of these results.

Subgroup analyses to explore potential causes of heterogeneity among included studies

Metaregression analyses to explore potential causes of heterogeneity among included studies

Cumulative meta-analyses

We used cumulative meta-analyses to investigate how the overall estimates of the outcomes of interest changed as each study was added in chronological order 72 ; change in depression scores and likelihood of treatment response both increased as the percentage of participants with past use of psychedelics increased across studies, as expected based on the metaregression analysis (see supplementary Appendix I). No other significant time related patterns were found.

We reanalysed the data for change in depression scores using a random effects Dersimonian and Laird model without the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman modification and compared the results with those of the original model. All comparisons found to be significant using the Dersimonian and Laird model with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment were also significant without the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment, and confidence intervals were only slightly narrower. Thus, small study effects do not appear to have played a major role in the treatment effect estimate.

Additionally, to estimate the accuracy and robustness of the estimated treatment effect, we excluded studies from the meta-analysis one by one; no important differences in the treatment effect, significance, and heterogeneity levels were observed after the exclusion of any study (see supplementary Appendix J).

In our meta-analysis we found that psilocybin use showed a significant benefit on change in depression scores compared with placebo. This is consistent with other recent meta-analyses and trials of psilocybin as a standalone treatment for depression 73 74 or in combination with psychological support. 24 25 29 30 31 32 68 75 This review adds to those finding by exploring the considerable heterogeneity across the studies, with subsequent subgroup analyses showing that the type of depression (primary or secondary) and the depression scale used (Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale, quick inventory of depressive symptomatology, or Beck depression inventory) had a significant differential effect on the outcome. High between study heterogeneity has been identified by some other meta-analyses of psilocybin (eg, Goldberg et al 29 ), with a higher treatment effect in studies with patients with comorbid life threatening conditions compared with patients with primary depression. 22 Although possible explanations, including personal factors (eg, patients with life threatening conditions being older) or depression related factors (eg, secondary depression being more severe than primary depression) could be considered, these hypotheses are not supported by baseline data (ie, patients with secondary depression do not differ substantially in age or symptom severity from patients with primary depression). The differential effects from assessment scales used have not been examined in other meta-analyses of psilocybin, but this review’s finding that studies using the Beck depression inventory showed a higher treatment effect than those using the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale and quick inventory of depressive symptomatology is consistent with studies in the psychological literature that have shown larger treatment effects when self-report scales are used (eg, Beck depression inventory). 76 77 This finding may be because clinicians tend to overestimate the severity of depression symptoms at baseline assessments, leading to less pronounced differences between before and after treatment identified in clinician assessed scales (eg, Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale, quick inventory of depressive symptomatology). 78

Metaregression analyses further showed that a higher average age and a higher percentage of participants with past use of psychedelics both correlated with a greater improvement in depression scores with psilocybin use and explained a substantial amount of between study variability. However, the cumulative meta-analysis showed that the effects of age might be largely an artefact of the inclusion of one specific study, and alternative explanations are worth considering. For instance, Studerus et al 79 identified participants’ age as the only personal variable significantly associated with psilocybin response, with older participants reporting a higher “blissful state” experience. This might be because of older people’s increased experience in managing negative emotions and the decrease in 5-hydroxytryptamine type 2A receptor density associated with older age. 80 Furthermore, Rootman et al 81 reported that the cognitive performance of older participants (>55 years) improved significantly more than that of younger participants after micro dosing with psilocybin. Therefore, the higher decrease in depressive symptoms associated with older age could be attributed to a decrease in cognitive difficulties experienced by older participants.

Interestingly, a clear pattern emerged for past use of psychedelics—the higher the proportion of study participants who had used psychedelics in the past, the higher the post-psilocybin treatment effect observed. Past use of psychedelics has been proposed to create an expectancy bias among participants and amplify the positive effects of psilocybin 82 83 84 ; however, this important finding has not been examined in other meta-analyses and may highlight the role of expectancy in psilocybin research.

Limitations of this study

Generalisability of the findings of this meta-analysis was limited by the lack of racial and ethnic diversity in the included studies—more than 90% of participants were white across all included trials, resulting in a homogeneous sample that is not representative of the general population. Moreover, it was not possible to distinguish between subgroups of participants who had never used psilocybin and those who had taken psilocybin more than a year before the start of the trial, as these data were not provided in the included studies. Such a distinction would be important, as the effects of psilocybin on mood may wane within a year after being administered. 21 85 Also, how psychological support was conceptualised was inconsistent within studies of psilocybin interventions; many studies failed to clearly describe the type of psychological support participants received, and others used methods ranging from directive guidance throughout the treatment session to passive encouragement or reassurance (eg, Griffiths et al, 14 Carhart-Harris et al 63 ). The included studies also did not gather evidence on participants’ previous experiences with treatment approaches, which could influence their response to the trials’ intervention. Thus, differences between participant subgroups related to past use of psilocybin or psychotherapy may be substantial and could help interpret this study’s findings more accurately. Lastly, the use of graphical extraction software to estimate the findings of studies where exact numerical data were not available (eg, Goodwin et al, 18 Grob et al 15 ), may have affected the robustness of the analyses.

A common limitation in studies of psilocybin is the likelihood of expectancy effects augmenting the treatment effect observed. Although some studies used low dose psychedelics as comparators to deal with this problem (eg, Carhart-Harris et al, 63 Goodwin et al, 18 Griffiths et al 14 ) or used a niacin placebo that can induce effects similar to those of psilocybin (eg, Grob et al, 15 Ross et al 17 ), the extent to which these methods were effective in blinding participants is not known. Other studies have, however, reported that participants can accurately identify the study groups to which they had been assigned 70-85% of the time, 84 86 indicating a high likelihood of insufficient blinding. This is especially likely for studies in which a high proportion of participants had previously used psilocybin and other hallucinogens, making the identification of the drug’s acute effects easier (eg, Griffiths et al, 14 Grob et al, 15 Ross et al 17 ). Patients also have expectations related to the outcome of their treatment, expecting psilocybin to improve their symptoms of depression, and these positive expectancies are strong predictors of actual treatment effects. 87 88 Importantly, the effect of outcome expectations on treatment effect is particularly strong when patient reported measures are used as primary outcomes, 89 which was the case in several of the included studies (eg, Griffiths et al, 14 Grob et al, 15 Ross et al 17 ). Unfortunately, none of the included studies recorded expectations before treatment, so it is not possible to determine the extent to which this factor affected the findings.

Implications for clinical practice

Although this review’s findings are encouraging for psilocybin’s potential as an effective antidepressant, a few areas about its applicability in clinical practice remain unexplored. Firstly, it is unclear whether the protocols for psilocybin interventions in clinical trials can be reliably and safely implemented in clinical practice. In clinical trials, patients receive psilocybin in a non-traditional medical setting, such as a specially designed living room, while they may be listening to curated calming music and are isolated from most external stimuli by wearing eyeshades and external noise-cancelling earphones. A trained therapist closely supervises these sessions, and the patient usually receives one or more preparatory sessions before the treatment commences. Standardising an intervention setting with so many variables is unlikely to be achievable in routine practice, and consensus is considerably lacking on the psychotherapeutic training and accreditations needed for a therapist to deliver such treatment. 90 The combination of these elements makes this a relatively complex and expensive intervention, which could make it challenging to gain approval from regulatory agencies and to gain reimbursement from insurance companies and others. Within publicly funded healthcare systems, the high cost of treatment may make psilocybin treatment inaccessible. The high cost associated with the intervention also increases the risk that unregulated clinics may attempt to cut costs by making alterations to the protocol and the therapeutic process, 91 92 which could have detrimental effects for patients. 92 93 94 Thus, avoiding the conflation of medical and commercial interests is a primary concern that needs to be dealt with before psilocybin enters mainstream practice.

Implications for future research

More large scale randomised trials with long follow-up are needed to fully understand psilocybin’s treatment potential, and future studies should aim to recruit a more diverse population. Another factor that would make clinical trials more representative of routine practice would be to recruit patients who are currently using or have used commonly prescribed serotonergic antidepressants. Clinical trials tend to exclude such participants because many antidepressants that act on the serotonin system modulate the 5-hydroxytryptamine type 2A receptor that psilocybin primarily acts upon, with prolonged use of tricyclic antidepressants associated with more intense psychedelic experiences and use of monoamine oxidase inhibitors or SSRIs inducing weaker responses to psychedelics. 95 96 97 Investigating psilocybin in such patients would, however, provide valuable insight on how psilocybin interacts with commonly prescribed drugs for depression and would help inform clinical practice.

Minimising the influence of expectancy effects is another core problem for future studies. One strategy would be to include expectancy measures and explore the level of expectancy as a covariate in statistical analysis. Researchers should also test the effectiveness of condition masking. Another proposed solution would be to adopt a 2×2 balanced placebo design, where both the drug (psilocybin or placebo) and the instructions given to participants (told they have received psilocybin or told they have received placebo) are crossed. 98 Alternatively, clinical trials could adopt a three arm design that includes both an inactive placebo (eg, saline) and active placebo (eg, niacin, lower psylocibin dose), 98 allowing for the effects of psilocybin to be separated from those of the placebo.

Overall, future studies should explore psilocybin’s exact mechanism of treatment effectiveness and outline how its physiological effects, mystical experiences, dosage, treatment setting, psychological support, and relationship with the therapist all interact to produce a synergistic antidepressant effect. Although this may be difficult to achieve using an explanatory randomised trial design, pragmatic clinical trial designs may be better suited to psilocybin research, as their primary objective is to achieve high external validity and generalisability. Such studies may include multiple alternative treatments rather than simply an active and placebo treatment comparison (eg, psilocybin v SSRI v serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor), and participants would be recruited from broader clinical populations. 99 100 Although such studies are usually conducted after a drug’s launch, 100 earlier use of such designs could help assess the clinical effectiveness of psilocybin more robustly and broaden patient access to a novel type of antidepressant treatment.

Conclusions

This review’s findings on psilocybin’s efficacy in reducing symptoms of depression are encouraging for its use in clinical practice as a drug intervention for patients with primary or secondary depression, particularly when combined with psychological support and administered in a supervised clinical environment. However, the highly standardised treatment setting, high cost, and lack of regulatory guidelines and legal safeguards associated with psilocybin treatment need to be dealt with before it can be established in clinical practice.

What is already known on this topic

Recent research on treatments for depression has focused on psychedelic agents that could have strong antidepressant effects without the drawbacks of classic antidepressants; psilocybin being one such substance

Over the past decade, several clinical trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews have investigated the use of psilocybin for symptoms of depression, and most have found that psilocybin can have antidepressant effects

Studies published to date have not investigated factors that may moderate psilocybin’s effects, including type of depression, past use of psychedelics, dosage, outcome measures, and publication biases

What this study adds

This review showed a significantly greater efficacy of psilocybin among patients with secondary depression, patients with past use of psychedelics, older patients, and studies using self-report measures for symptoms of depression

Efficacy did not appear to be homogeneous across patient types—for example, those with depression and a life threatening illness appeared to benefit more from treatment

Further research is needed to clarify the factors that maximise psilocybin’s treatment potential for symptoms of depression

Ethics statements

Ethical approval.

This study was approved by the ethics committee of the University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Medicine, which waived the need for ethical approval and the need to obtain consent for the collection, analysis, and publication of the retrospectively obtained anonymised data for this non-interventional study.

Data availability statement

The relevant aggregated data and statistical code will be made available on reasonable request to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

We thank DT who acted as an independent secondary reviewer during the study selection and data review process.

Contributors: AMM contributed to the design and implementation of the research, analysis of the results, and writing of the manuscript. MC was involved in planning and supervising the work and contributed to the writing of the manuscript. AMM and MC are the guarantors. The corresponding author attests that all listed authors meet authorship criteria and that no others meeting the criteria have been omitted.

Funding: None received.

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at https://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; AMM is employed by IDEA Pharma, which does consultancy work for pharmaceutical companies developing drugs for physical and mental health conditions; MC was the supervisor for AMM’s University of Oxford MSc dissertation, which forms the basis for this paper; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Transparency: The corresponding author (AMM) affirms that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as registered have been explained.

Dissemination to participants and related patient and public communities: To disseminate our findings and increase the impact of our research, we plan on writing several social media posts and blog posts outlining the main conclusions of our paper. These will include blog posts on the websites of the University of Oxford’s Department of Primary Care Health Sciences and Department for Continuing Education, as well as print publications, which are likely to reach a wider audience. Furthermore, we plan to present our findings and discuss them with the public in local mental health related events and conferences, which are routinely attended by patient groups and advocacy organisations.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ .

↵ World Health Organization. Depressive Disorder (Depression); 2023. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/depression .
GBD 2017 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators
Cipriani A ,
Furukawa TA ,
Salanti G ,
Trivedi MH ,
Wisniewski SR ,
Mitchell AJ
Bockting CL ,
Hollon SD ,
Jarrett RB ,
Nierenberg AA ,
Petersen TJ ,
Páleníček T ,
Carbonaro TM ,
Bradstreet MP ,
Barrett FS ,
Carhart-Harris RL ,
Bolstridge M ,
Griffiths RR ,
Johnson MW ,
Carducci MA ,
Danforth AL ,
Chopra GS ,
Kraehenmann R ,
Preller KH ,
Scheidegger M ,
Goodwin GM ,
Aaronson ST ,
Alvarez O ,
Bogenschutz MP ,
Podrebarac SK ,
Roseman L ,
Galvão-Coelho NL ,
Gonzalez M ,
Dos Santos RG ,
Osório FL ,
Crippa JA ,
Zuardi AW ,
Cleare AJ ,
Martelli C ,
Benyamina A
Vollenweider FX ,
Demetriou L ,
Carhart-Harris RL
Timmermann C ,
Giribaldi B ,
Goldberg SB ,
Nicholas CR ,
Raison CL ,
Irizarry R ,
Winczura A ,
Dimassi O ,
Dhillon N ,
Griffiths RR
Castro Santos H ,
Gama Marques J
Moreno FA ,
Wiegand CB ,
Taitano EK ,
Liberati A ,
Tetzlaff J ,
Altman DG ,
PRISMA Group
Sterne JAC ,
Savović J ,
Guyatt GH ,
Schünemann HJ ,
Tugwell P ,
Knottnerus A
Sterne JA ,
Sutton AJ ,
Ioannidis JP ,
Higgins JPT ,
Chandler J ,
Borenstein M ,
Hedges LV ,
Higgins JP ,
Rothstein HR
DerSimonian R ,
↵ Borenstein M, Hedges L, Rothstein H. Meta-analysis: Fixed effect vs. random effects. Meta-analysis. com. 2007;1-62.
IntHout J ,
Rovers MM ,
Gøtzsche PC
Spineli LM ,
↵ Higgins JP, Green S. Identifying and measuring heterogeneity. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. 2011;5(0).
Austin PC ,
O’Donnell KC ,
Mennenga SE ,
Bogenschutz MP
Sander SD ,
Berlin JA ,
Santanna J ,
Schmid CH ,
Szczech LA ,
Feldman HI ,
Anti-Lymphocyte Antibody Induction Therapy Study Group
↵ Iyengar S, Greenhouse J. Sensitivity analysis and diagnostics. Handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. Russell Sage Foundation, 2009:417-33.
McKenzie JE ,
Bossuyt PM ,
↵ Griffiths R, Barrett F, Johnson M, Mary C, Patrick F, Alan D. Psilocybin-Assisted Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: Results From a Randomized Trial. Proceedings of the ACNP 58th Annual Meeting: Poster Session II. In Neuropsychopharmacology. 2019;44:230-384.
↵ Barrett F. ACNP 58th Annual Meeting: Panels, Mini-Panels and Study Groups. [Abstract.] Neuropsychopharmacology 2019;44:1-77. doi: 10.1038/s41386-019-0544-z . OpenUrl CrossRef
Benville J ,
Agin-Liebes G ,
Roberts DE ,
Gukasyan N ,
Hurwitz ES ,
Považan M ,
Rosenberg MD ,
Carhart-Harris R ,
Buehler S ,
Kettner H ,
von Rotz R ,
Schindowski EM ,
Jungwirth J ,
Vargas AS ,
Barroso M ,
Gallardo E ,
Isojarvi J ,
Lefebvre C ,
Glanville J
Sukpraprut-Braaten S ,
Narlesky M ,
Strayhan RC
Prouzeau D ,
Conejero I ,
Voyvodic PL ,
Becamel C ,
Lopez-Castroman J
Więckiewicz G ,
Stokłosa I ,
Gorczyca P ,
John Mann J ,
Currier D ,
Zimmerman M ,
Friedman M ,
Boerescu DA ,
Attiullah N
Borgherini G ,
Conforti D ,
Studerus E ,
Kometer M ,
Vollenweider FX
Pinborg LH ,
Rootman JM ,
Kryskow P ,
Turner EH ,
Rosenthal R
Bershad AK ,
Schepers ST ,
Bremmer MP ,
Sepeda ND ,
Hurwitz E ,
Horvath AO ,
Del Re AC ,
Flückiger C ,
Rutherford BR ,
Pearson C ,
Husain SF ,
Harris KM ,
George JR ,
Michaels TI ,
Sevelius J ,
Williams MT
Collins A ,
Bonson KR ,
Buckholtz JW ,
Yamauchi M ,
Matsushima T ,
Coleshill MJ ,
Colloca L ,
Zachariae R ,
Colagiuri B
Heifets BD ,
Pratscher SD ,
Bradley E ,
Sugarman J ,

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly.

To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation .

Notifications

SakshiJethwa2024/PG-Dissertation-Management-System---WEB-IN-JAVA

Folders and files, repository files navigation, pg-dissertation-management-system---web-java.

It is a Full Stack Web Development Project developed using technologies ReactJS, SpringBoot and MongoDB. This project is aimed to streamline the management of postgraduates dissertations which simplifies the entire process from proposal submission to final evaluation ensuring seamless experience for both students and guides.

Includes the whole Project report with project description, class diagram , use case diagram , database design , implementatation details , test case design , user manual.

IMAGES

How to write a results section for a dissertation
Best Dissertation Result Help Online UK with Upto 50% OFF
Follow Our Guide on How to Write Result Section of Dissertation
How to Write a Dissertation: Tips & Step-by-Step Guide
How to write a dissertation introduction to grab the reader’s attention
Reliable Essay and Dissertation Results

VIDEO

🇳🇿 소논문 결과 이메일로 받고 소리질렀습니다/Received my dissertation results via email and screamed
ICMR-National Institute for Pathology, New Delhi Admission to PhD Program & MSc Dissertation 2023-24
Research Methodologies
Journal Publication
Dissertation Report Corporate Study Financial services Provide by ICICI Bank dissertation report MBA
How to structure a Dissertation| A Step-by-Step Guide

COMMENTS

How to Write a Results Section
The results chapter of a thesis or dissertation presents your research results concisely and objectively. In quantitative research, for each question or hypothesis, state: The type of analysis used; Relevant results in the form of descriptive and inferential statistics; Whether or not the alternative hypothesis was supported
Dissertation Results/Findings Chapter (Quantitative)
The results chapter (also referred to as the findings or analysis chapter) is one of the most important chapters of your dissertation or thesis because it shows the reader what you've found in terms of the quantitative data you've collected. It presents the data using a clear text narrative, supported by tables, graphs and charts.
Dissertation Results & Findings Chapter (Qualitative)
The results chapter in a dissertation or thesis (or any formal academic research piece) is where you objectively and neutrally present the findings of your qualitative analysis (or analyses if you used multiple qualitative analysis methods ). This chapter can sometimes be combined with the discussion chapter (where you interpret the data and ...
How to Write a Dissertation Results Section
The results section is where you report the main findings of your research. Watch this video to learn how to report your results concisely and objectively in...
How to Write a Results Section: Definition, Tips & Examples
The easiest way to write a quantitative dissertation results section is to build it around a sub-question or hypothesis of your research. For each subquery, provide relevant results and include statistical analysis. Then briefly evaluate importance & reliability. Notice how each result relates to the problem or whether it supports the hypothesis.
How to Write the Dissertation Findings or Results
Here is an example of how to report quantitative results in your dissertation findings chapter; Two hundred seventeen participants completed both the pretest and post-test and a Pairwise T-test was used for the analysis. The quantitative data analysis reveals a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the pretest and ...
How to Write the Results Section of your Dissertation?
A well-structured results section enables readers to understand the progression of your experiments and the relationship between different findings. Begin by reminding readers of the research questions or hypotheses that guided your study. This alignment helps establish a clear connection between the objectives of your research and the ...
Dissertation Writing: Results and Discussion
When writing a dissertation or thesis, the results and discussion sections can be both the most interesting as well as the most challenging sections to write. You may choose to write these sections separately, or combine them into a single chapter, depending on your university's guidelines and your own preferences.
What Is a Dissertation?
A dissertation is a long-form piece of academic writing based on original research conducted by you. It is usually submitted as the final step in order to finish a PhD program. Your dissertation is probably the longest piece of writing you've ever completed. It requires solid research, writing, and analysis skills, and it can be intimidating ...
Dissertation/Thesis Results Template (Word Doc
What's Included: Results Chapter Template. This template covers all the core components required in the results chapter of a typical dissertation, thesis or research project: The opening /overview section. The body section for qualitative studies. The body section for quantitative studies. Concluding summary.
How to Write an Impressive Thesis Results Section
Include all relevant results as text, tables, or figures. Report the results of subject recruitment and data collection. For qualitative research, present the data from all statistical analyses, whether or not the results are significant. For quantitative research, present the data by coding or categorizing themes and topics.
The Results Section of a Dissertation
Conventionally, the results section is the fourth chapter of your dissertation, written after you present your method of study. How exactly you present your findings differs from study to study, depending on the topic and discipline your research is situated in, the methods you used, and what kind of data you are presenting.
The Results and Discussion
Guide contents. As part of the Writing the Dissertation series, this guide covers the most common conventions of the results and discussion chapters, giving you the necessary knowledge, tips and guidance needed to impress your markers! The sections are organised as follows: The Difference - Breaks down the distinctions between the results and discussion chapters.
Dissertation Results Section Writing Guide
Writing The Results Section. To make the dissertation easier to interpret, it is best to have a results chapter and then a discussion chapter separately. By separating these two sections, you are then able to present the findings and then interpret them and review them against any secondary data found in the literature review or in the ...
How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter
Dissertation discussion is the chapter where you explore the relevance, significance, and meanings of your findings - allowing you to showcase your talents in describing and analyzing the results of your study.. Here, you will be expected to demonstrate how your research findings answer the research questions established or test the hypothesis.
Guide on How to Write the Results Section of a Dissertation
The results chapter of a dissertation should include the core findings of a study. Essentially, only the findings of a specific study should be included in this section. These include: Data presented in graphs, tables, charts, and figures. Data collection recruitment, collection, and/or participants. Secondary findings like subgroup analyses ...
Dissertation Structure & Layout 101 (+ Examples)
Time to recap…. And there you have it - the traditional dissertation structure and layout, from A-Z. To recap, the core structure for a dissertation or thesis is (typically) as follows: Title page. Acknowledgments page. Abstract (or executive summary) Table of contents, list of figures and tables.
Writing up the results section of your dissertation
PICTURE 2. Results of ANOVA for regression: Now you need to report the value of R 2 (see PICTURE 3), which tells you the degree to which your model predicted self-esteem scores. You need to multiply this value by 100 to get a percentage. Thus, if your R 2 value is .335, the percentage becomes 33.5%.
Dissertation Results Chapter 101: Qualitative Methodology Studies
Learn how to write up a high-quality results chapter for your qualitative dissertation or thesis. We explain what exactly the results chapter is (and the pur...
Reporting Research Results in APA Style
Reporting Research Results in APA Style | Tips & Examples. Published on December 21, 2020 by Pritha Bhandari.Revised on January 17, 2024. The results section of a quantitative research paper is where you summarize your data and report the findings of any relevant statistical analyses.. The APA manual provides rigorous guidelines for what to report in quantitative research papers in the fields ...
PDF A Complete Dissertation
A Complete Dissertation The Big Picture OVERVIEW Following is a road map that briefly outlines the contents of an entire dissertation. This is a comprehensive overview, and as such is helpful in making sure that at a glance you understand up front the necessary elements that will constitute each section of your dissertation.
General recommendations on how to write a dissertation results section
The general importance of dissertation results. Dissertation is a big research report that should show certain results of a student's work. According to the academic requirements a dissertation consists of several sections, such as hypothesis, introduction, practical part (that describes research methods), discussion, conclusions, and dissertation results.
Integration of Artificial Intelligence and Human Factors in Mobile Work
The transportation system is facing serious safety concerns at work zones and intersections, which are two major areas where accidents and fatalities occur. In addition, slow improvement in transportation industry workers' performance is also a bottleneck to overall productivity. This dissertation aims to integrate artificial intelligence and human factors to improve the safety of mobile ...
Efficacy of psilocybin for treating symptoms of depression ...
Results Meta-analysis on 436 participants (228 female participants), average age 36-60 years, from seven of the nine included studies showed a significant benefit of psilocybin (Hedges' g=1.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 2.73, P<0.001) on change in depression scores compared with comparator treatment. Subgroup analyses and metaregressions indicated that having secondary depression ...
SakshiJethwa2024/PG-Dissertation-Management-System---WEB-IN-JAVA
Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly. Name. Query. To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation. Cancel Create saved search Sign in ... PG-Dissertation-Management-System---WEB-JAVA. About. No description, website, or topics provided. Resources. Readme Activity. Stars. 0 stars Watchers. 1 watching Forks.

How to Write a Results Section for a Dissertation or Research Paper: Guide & Examples

What Is a Results Section of Dissertation?

Dissertation: Results vs Discussion vs Conclusion

Present Your Findings When Writing Results Section of Dissertation

Qualitative Results Section in Dissertation

Quantitative Results Section in a Dissertation

Tables and Figures in Results Section in Dissertation

Tips on How to Write a Results Section

What to Avoid When Writing the Results Section of a Dissertation

Dissertation Results Section Example

Final Thoughts on Writing Results Section of Dissertation

How to Write the Results Section of your Dissertation or Thesis?

Introduction

Upcoming Events

Recent Posts

Writing your Dissertation: Results and Discussion

Results Section

Discussion Section

Starting the Task

Fleshing Out the Detail

The Importance of Understanding Differences

How to Write an Impressive Thesis Results Section

What is the thesis results section?

What should the thesis results section include?

What should the thesis results section not include?

How should the thesis results section be organized?

Differences among the results section in different fields of research

Differences between reporting thesis results in the Sciences and the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) domains

Best practices for using tables and figures

General guidelines for figures and tables

Figure guidelines

Table guidelines

Tips for writing the thesis results section

Results vs. discussion vs. conclusion

Editor’s pick

Review Checklist

Frequently Asked Questions

How to identify whether paraphrasing is required? +

What information do i need to provide? +

Is repetition percentage of 25-30% considered acceptable by the journal for my manuscript? +

Do you offer help to rewrite and paraphrase the plagiarized text in my manuscript? +

Which international languages does iThenticate have content for in its database? +

Writing the Dissertation - Guides for Success: The Results and Discussion

Overview of writing the results and discussion

Disciplinary differences

Guide contents

Training and tools

Introduction

Results or discussion - what's the difference?

Writing the results

Tables and figures

Using quotations

Writing the discussion

A note on the three-part structure

Using secondary literature

Limitations

Recommendations

What to avoid

Over-reliance on tables and figures

Ignoring unexpected or contradictory data

Including raw data

Presenting new results in the discussion

Overstressing the significance of your research

Q: What’s the difference between the results and discussion?

Q: Should the discussion include recommendations for future research?

Q: Should the discussion include the limitations of the study?

Q: Should the results and discussion be in the first-person or third?

Q: Is there a difference between the discussion and the conclusion of a dissertation?

How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter – A Quick Guide with Examples

Steps of How to Write Dissertation Discussion Chapter

2. Interpretations of Results

3. Implications of your Study

Looking for dissertation help?

4. Recognise the Limitations of your Research

5. Provide Recommendations for Future Research

The Purpose of Dissertation Discussion Chapter

Useful Tips

Relating to Previous Chapters

Using Subsections and Subheadings

Critical Thinking

The Caveat