• Introduction

• Research report contents

• The total process

• Choosing your topic

Introduction

Every report has certain features that help it convey information and ideas in the clearest and most accessible way. Once you have a 'big picture' of the possible parts of a report and where they fit in the whole, it will be easier to visualise your own work in a similar form. Remember, though, that it is your work and it does not have to take on a particular structure if you can justify a more original approach. You will soon discover that structure and sequence are nearly always determined by the purpose you have in mind for each chapter or section.

There is a sample list of report parts in a conventional sequence in the subsection 'Chapters, sections and parts' under 'Research report contents'. You will also find relevant information in 'The review of literature'.

A light-hearted look at the process of conducting and writing up research, with revelations as to the motivations and purposes involved in each of the major stages, is in the section ‘The total process’ in the subsection 'The story of a research study'. Two other subsections, 'Three stages of research' and tips on 'Establishing good practice', are also in 'The total process'.

Selecting a feasible research topic can be a rewarding process if you learn how to refine your ideas and reduce your focus to something manageable. This process is discussed in ‘Choosing your topic’. A series of planning sheets will help you determine 'What topic?', 'Why this topic?' and 'How you will research this topic?' (that is, how do you propose to conduct your research?). The planning sheet 'Finalising your topic choice' allows you to pin down and summarise some thoughts and finalise your position on the topic. Don't forget - topic choice is a highly volatile activity, and you may change your mind or narrow your boundaries many times before deciding on your final research design. Do use these planning sheets as a reflective tool as often as you need.

Research report contents

Chapters, sections and parts

Below is a list and sequence of the various parts you might want to include in your thesis or report.

Be aware of naming and order variations within your specific discipline by comparing this list with those of other theses and reports in your discipline.

It is important to place each part in a logical position so that your reader builds up an understanding of the theoretical frameworks and practical aspects of your study in a clear, identifiable sequence which unfolds the story and reveals the next piece of appropriate information with conscious timing.

The review of literature

Introduction
Most research is conducted within the context of existing findings and speculations by a community of researchers in each discipline. Your study will draw from such a pool of professionally shared knowledge and will undoubtedly contribute further to the traditional understandings in your field.

1. First, we consider what is 'The purpose of the review of literature'. You will find that the purpose and character of each chapter in a research report are intricately linked.
2. There is a comprehensive overview of the processes involved in planning and writing a successful review of literature in  'A general guide to writing a review of literature'.
3. Become familiar with the ways in which research is conducted, presented and discussed in your professional area, specifically within the schools of the Faculty of Health and Biomedical Science at the University of South Australia. The section 'Writing in the Health and Biomedical Sciences'  has a subsection on conducting the review, with extracts from a study guide and several papers (as PDF (portable document format) files to be read with Acrobat Reader). The subsection is 'The review of literature: teachings of the Faculty'.
4. Work through some or all of the planning sheets in the section 'Organising your ideas: The planning sheets'.   These will help you sort and shape the items you have read into a cohesive and well-conceived whole.

The purpose of the review of literature
The review of literature familiarises your reader with the what, why and how of your topic.

• What?
  Reading: the extent, nature and relevance of your academic reading in the field(s) covered by your research. 
  Interpretation: your own critical and scholarly interpretation of this body of literature.
  Presentation: your presentation of the many separate items as a coherent whole.
• Why?
  • to establish a context for your study
  • to present and critically evaluate the relevant conceptual frameworks and associated research that has been conducted to date in your field
  • to pinpoint an area of focus constituting a 'gap' which your study aims to fill
• How?
  Prepare for a reflective cycle of searching, reading, conceptualising, organising, shaping and presenting.  At each stage you are aiming to pinpoint the exact position within an existing body of research in which your own study can make its contribution.  Try to establish systematic work practices which enhance the possibilities of this process.

As a result, your reader will discover the breadth, depth and scope of your topic through the readings you present.  You will show your keenly critical discernment as to the validity and relevance of the previous research and the theoretical frameworks you have chosen to include.

A general guide to writing a review of literature
A literature review represents the reading you have done in connection with your research study.  It is written and structured to:

• show the background against which your thinking processes have emerged
• elucidate the theoretical frameworks you have adopted or developed as a result of becoming familiar with existing literature in the field

Your initial reading is likely to be very broad as you consider your research focus.  Gradually you will become more selective as you narrow the field.   At the same time, you will find that one reading leads naturally to others, as you search for relevant materials.  Your aim should be to explore at increasingly greater depth in order to gain knowledge and understanding which will be relevant to your specific interest. Each new reading will shift your overview, and each time that you shift closer to your own focus you will be able to plan your study with greater clarity. 

Tone
The tone of a thesis aims for clarity, precise expression and academic rigour. This may be achieved in various ways, including:

• use of impersonal language where possible (Check with your supervisor whether you can refer to yourself as 'I'. Opinions differ in different disciplines.)
• use of appropriate terminology (Always define specialist terms as they arise.)

The reflective cycle: searching, organising, presenting
Searching is a systematic process best handled if you consciously develop skills in search procedures, including:

• library borrowing and interlibrary loans
• accessing through reference catalogues and indexes
• using relevant computer software, CD-ROMs, and the Internet
• browsing in bookshelves and journals
• subscribing to journals
• discussing issues with colleagues

It is a good idea to read review articles as a preliminary step in your search. This gives you an overview of the main areas of interest and often helps you build up a sound framework from which to generate your own well-informed opinions.

Know what you want and how to find it. Many people can help you, especially when you know how to describe what you are looking for. Keeping a record of your searches in an ongoing search log can be extremely useful and time-saving.

Organising yourself, your material, your reading and your records is a major key to success in research. It is easy to become overwhelmed by the volume of material you accumulate. You will help yourself enormously if you create workable recording systems and take one step at a time within those systems.

Whatever you read:

• take a photocopy or note down the location of the original
• complete a booknotes sheet for each item without delay
• record publication details immediately
• note main points in a summary or diagrammatic form
• look for meanings and implications and write down your thoughts straightaway
• write out direct quotes accurately, with quotation marks and page numbers

Various tools can be used which to help you organise your reading into easily accessible interlinked groups:

• computer software for referencing (for example, RefCard, Endnotes)
• booknotes or a card file system for annotating each item - compile your own numbering system
• a notebook for each major component of your reading
• a manilla folder for each component of your reading (for storing 'scraps')

An ongoing reading journal is extremely helpful. As you write down your thoughts and responses to the reading, you will find that the new material interacts with what you already know or needed to know. Your understanding builds up systematically and generates new thoughts - this is a very important part of the reflective cycle.

It is a good idea to establish some headings, or categories, for your reading as soon as possible. Think of this as your own private 'Dewey' system in which all new information can find a place. The categories should later fit into the structure of your literature review.

It is extremely useful to build up an ongoing concept map as you go along, adding authors in their position of greatest relevance to your purposes.

Presenting the literature is an important process of articulating what you make of what you have read. Eventually, the many readings must be gathered and presented as a coherent whole. If you have worked consistently to draw out and record the most relevant features of each as you have gone along, this process may not be as daunting as you first thought.

There are four major interlinking processes in the presentation of a literature review:

1. Critiquing rather than merely listing each item
   A good literature review is led by your own critical thought processes - it is not simply a catalogue of what has been written.

   Once you have established which authors and ideas are linked, take each group in turn and really think about what you want to achieve in presenting them this way. This is your opportunity for showing that you did not take all your reading at face value, but that you have the knowledge and skills to interpret the authors' meanings and intentions in relation to each other, particularly if there are conflicting views or incompatible findings in a particular area.

   Rest assured that developing a sense of critical judgement in the literature surrounding a topic is a gradual process of gaining familiarity with the concepts, language, terminology and conventions in the field. In the early stages of your research you cannot be expected to have a fully developed appreciation of the implications of all findings.

   As you get used to reading at this level of intensity within your field you will find it easier and more purposeful to ask questions as you read:

   • what is this all about?
   • who is saying it and what authority do they have?
   • why is it significant?
   • what is its context?
   • how was it reached?
   • how valid is it?
   • how reliable is the evidence?
   • what has been gained?
   • what do other authors say?
   • how does it contribute?
   • so what?
2. Structuring the fragments into a coherent body
   Through your reading and discussions with your supervisor during the searching and organising phases of the cycle, you will eventually reach a final decision as to your own topic and research design.

   As you begin to group together the items you read, the direction of your literature review will emerge with greater clarity. This is a good time to finalise your concept map, grouping linked items, ideas and authors into firm categories as they relate more obviously to your own study.

   Now you can plan the structure of your written literature review, with your own intentions and conceptual framework in mind. Knowing what you want to convey will help you decide the most appropriate structure.

   A review can take many forms; for example:

   • an historical survey of theory and research in your field
   • a synthesis of several paradigms
   • a process of narrowing down to your own topic

   It is likely that your literature review will contain elements of all of these.

   As with all academic writing, a literature review needs:

   • an introduction
   • a body
   • a conclusion

   The introduction sets the scene and lays out the various elements that are to be explored.

   The body takes each element in turn, usually as a series of headed sections and subsections. The first paragraph or two of each section mentions the major authors in association with their main ideas and areas of debate. The section then expands on these ideas and authors, showing how each relates to the others, and how the debate informs your understanding of the topic. A short conclusion at the end of each section presents a synthesis of these linked ideas.

   The final conclusion of the literature review ties together the main points from each of your sections and this is then used to build the framework for your own study. Later, when you come to write the discussion chapter of your thesis, you should be able to relate your findings in one-to-one correspondence with many of the concepts or questions that were firmed up in the conclusion of your literature review.

3. Controlling the 'voice' of your citations in the text (by selective use of direct quoting, paraphrasing and summarising)
   

   You can treat published literature like any other data, but the difference is that it is not data you generated yourself.

   When you report on your own findings, you are likely to present the results with reference to their source, for example:

   • 'Table 2 shows that sixteen of the twenty subjects responded positively.'

   When using published data, you would say:

   • 'Positive responses were recorded for 80 per cent of the subjects (see table 2).'

   or

   • 'From the results shown in table 2, it appears that the majority of subjects responded positively.'

   In these examples your source of information is table 2. Had you found the same results on page 17 of a text by Smith published in 1988, you would naturally substitute the name, date and page number for 'table 2'. In each case it would be your voice introducing a fact or statement that had been generated somewhere else.

   You could see this process as building a wall: you select and place the 'bricks' and your 'voice' provides the 'mortar' which determines how strong the wall will be. In turn, this is significant in the assessment of the merit and rigour of your work.

   There are three ways to combine an idea and its source with your own voice:

   • direct quote
   • paraphrase
   • summary

   In each method, the author's name and publication details must be associated with the words in the text, using an approved referencing system. If you don't do this you would be in severe breach of academic convention, and might be penalised. Your field of study has its own referencing conventions you should investigate before writing up your results.

   Direct quoting repeats exact wording and thus directly represents the author:

   • 'Rain is likely when the sky becomes overcast' (Smith 1988, page 27).

   If the quotation is run in with your text, single quotation marks are used to enclose it, and it must be an identical copy of the original in every respect.

   Overuse or simple 'listing' of quotes can substantially weaken your own argument by silencing your critical view or voice.

   Paraphrasing is repeating an idea in your own words, with no loss of the author's intended meaning:

   • As Smith (1988) pointed out in the late eighties, rain may well be indicated by the presence of cloud in the sky.

   Paraphrasing allows you to organise the ideas expressed by the authors without being rigidly constrained by the grammar, tense and vocabulary of the original. You retain a degree of flexibility as to whose voice comes through most strongly.

   Summarising means to shorten or crystallise a detailed piece of writing by restating the main points in your own words and in the order in which you found them. The original writing is 'described' as if from the outside, and it is your own voice that is predominant:

   • Referring to the possible effects of cloudy weather, Smith (1988) predicted the likelihood of rain.
   • Smith (1988) claims that some degree of precipitation could be expected as the result of clouds in the sky: he has clearly discounted the findings of Jones (1986).
4. Using appropriate language
   Your writing style represents you as a researcher, and reflects how you are dealing with the subtleties and complexities inherent in the literature.

   Once you have established a good structure with appropriate headings for your literature review, and once you are confident in controlling the voice in your citations, you should find that your writing becomes more lucid and fluent because you know what you want to say and how to say it.

   The good use of language depends on the quality of the thinking behind the writing, and on the context of the writing. You need to conform to discipline-specific requirements. However, there may still be some points of grammar and vocabulary you would like to improve. If you have doubts about your confidence to use the English language well, you can help yourself in several ways:

   • ask for feedback on your writing from friends, colleagues and academics
   • look for specific language information in reference materials
   • access programs or self-paced learning resources which may be available on your campus

   Grammar tips - practical and helpful
   The following guidance on tenses and other language tips may be useful.

   Which tense should I use?

   Use present tense:

   • for generalisations and claims:
     • The sky is blue.
   • to convey ideas, especially theories, which exist for the reader at the time of reading:
     • I think therefore I am.
   • for authors' statements of a theoretical nature, which can then be compared on equal terms with others:
     • Smith (1988) suggests that ...
   • in referring to components of your own document:
     • Table 2 shows ...

   Use present perfect tense for:

   • recent events or actions that are still linked in an unresolved way to the present:
     • Several studies have attempted to ...

   Use simple past tense for:

   • completed events or actions:
     • Smith (1988) discovered that ...

   Use past perfect tense for:

   • events which occurred before a specified past time:
     • Prior to these findings, it had been thought that ...

   Use modals (may, might, could, would, should) to:

   • convey degrees of doubt
     • This may indicate that ... this would imply that ...

   Other language tips

   • Convey your meaning in the simplest possible way. Don't try to use an intellectual tone for the sake of it, and do not rely on your reader to read your mind!
   • Keep sentences short and simple when you wish to emphasise a point.
   • Use compound (joined simple) sentences to write about two or more ideas which may be linked with 'and', 'but', 'because', 'whereas' etc.
   • Use complex sentences when you are dealing with embedded ideas or those that show the interaction of two or more complex elements.
   • Verbs are more dynamic than nouns, and nouns carry information more densely than verbs.
   • Select active or passive verbs according to whether you are highlighting the 'doer' or the 'done to' of the action.
   • Keep punctuation to a minimum. Use it to separate the elements of complex sentences in order to keep subject, verb and object in clear view.
   • Avoid densely packed strings of words, particularly nouns.

The total process

The story of a research study

Introduction
I looked at the situation and found that I had a question to ask about it. I wanted to investigate something in particular.

Review of literature
So I read everything I could find on the topic - what was already known and said and what had previously been found. I established exactly where my investigation would fit into the big picture, and began to realise at this stage how my study would be different from anything done previously.

Methodology
I decided on the number and description of my subjects, and with my research question clearly in mind, designed my own investigation process, using certain known research methods (and perhaps some that are not so common). I began with the broad decision about which research paradigm I would work within (that is, qualitative/quantitative, critical/interpretive/ empiricist). Then I devised my research instrument to get the best out of what I was investigating. I knew I would have to analyse the raw data, so I made sure that the instrument and my proposed method(s) of analysis were compatible right from the start. Then I carried out the research study and recorded all the data in a methodical way according to my intended methods of analysis. As part of the analysis, I reduced the data (by means of my preferred form of classification) to manageable thematic representation (tables, graphs, categories, etc). It was then that I began to realise what I had found.

Findings/results
What had I found? What did the tables/graphs/categories etc. have to say that could be pinned down? It was easy enough for me to see the salient points at a glance from these records, but in writing my report, I also spelled out what I had found truly significant to make sure it was not missed by my readers. For each display of results, I wrote a corresponding summary of important observations relating only elements within my own set of results and comparing only like with like. I was careful not to let my own interpretations intrude or voice my excitement just yet. I wanted to state the facts - just the facts. I dealt correctly with all inferential statistical procedures, applying tests of significance where appropriate to ensure both reliability and validity. I knew that I wanted my results to be as watertight and squeaky clean as possible. They would carry a great deal more credibility, strength and thereby academic 'clout' if I took no shortcuts and remained both rigorous and scholarly.

Discussion
Now I was free to let the world know the significance of my findings. What did I find in the results that answered my original research question? Why was I so sure I had some answers? What about the unexplained or unexpected findings? Had I interpreted the results correctly? Could there have been any other factors involved? Were my findings supported or contested by the results of similar studies? Where did that leave mine in terms of contribution to my field? Can I actually generalise from my findings in a breakthrough of some kind, or do I simply see myself as reinforcing existing knowledge? And so what, after all? There were some obvious limitations to my study, which, even so, I'll defend to the hilt. But I won't become over-apologetic about the things left undone, or the abandoned analyses, the fascinating byways sadly left behind. I have my memories ...

Conclusion
We'll take a long hard look at this study from a broad perspective. How does it rate? How did I end up answering the question I first thought of? The conclusion needs to be a few clear, succinct sentences. That way, I'll know that I know what I'm talking about. I'll wrap up with whatever generalisations I can make, and whatever implications have arisen in my mind as a result of doing this thing at all. The more you find out, the more questions arise. How I wonder what you are ... how I speculate. OK, so where do we all go from here?

Three stages of research

There are three stages of research: reading, research design and implementation, and writing up the research report or thesis. Each of these stages has associated activities.

1. Reading

• keeping notes
• thinking
• comparing
• critically evaluating existing knowledge

2. Research design and implementation

• dealing with practicalities
• thinking logically and planning
• concept-mapping
• hypothesising
• organising the experiment, testing, interviewing
• data gathering and recording
• reducing data and analysing
• deciding on the implications of the findings

3. Writing up the research report or thesis

• considering structure, purpose, sequence, voice and language for each section; devising frameworks
• constructing arguments
• using existing notes as a basis for expanded text
• using conventions correctly
• using headings logically
• writing often
• keeping words flowing

Use an active, cyclical writing process: draft, check, reflect, revise, redraft.

Establishing good practice

1. Keep your research question always in mind.
2. Read widely to establish a context for your research.
3. Read widely to collect information which may relate to your topic, particularly to your hypothesis or research question.
4. Be systematic with your reading, note-taking and referencing records.
5. Train yourself to select what you do need and reject what you don't need.
6. Keep a research journal to reflect on your processes, decisions, state of mind, changes of mind, reactions to experimental outcomes etc.
7. Discuss your ideas with your supervisor and interested others.
8. Keep a systematic log of technical records of your experimental and other research data, remembering to date each entry, and noting any discrepancies or unexpected occurrences at the time you notice them.
9. Design your research approaches in detail in the early stages so that you have frameworks to fit findings into straightaway.
10. Know how you will analyse data so that your formats correspond from the start.
11. Keep going back to the whole picture. Be thoughtful and think ahead about the way you will consider and store new information as it comes to light.

Choosing your topic

Introduction

Choosing and refining a topic can be one of the most protracted and difficult processes in research. The world seems so full of questions.

The planning sheets (downloadable Word 6 files) are designed to help you make a few decisions about what really interests you and what is feasible as a research topic.

Note for planning sheets: assistance on:

• downloading Netscape
• Configuring Netscape and downloading files

Don't forget your ideas may change and you can go through this process as many times as you like.

You have two options:

1. Type your ideas in the appropriate areas then save or save and print out the result.
2. Print out the planning sheet for each task and complete it in your own handwriting.

Some questions in the planning sheets will ask for a short answer. Some invite you to make an honest exploration of your thoughts and feelings, which may take a little more time and space. Don't be surprised if you end up writing pages; this could be the beginning of a beautiful relationship with your academic self. You may even like to continue throughout this research study to write down your personal plans, reactions, speculations and doubts in a notebook or designated computer file which then becomes your personal research journal - a most useful tool for reflection and decision-making at all stages of your research.

This process will help you summarise your choices and consolidate your thinking in a way that may be useful to discuss with your supervisor or fellow students.

What topic?

It is important to feel that you have selected a research topic which will remain interesting to you - one small enough to investigate effectively, with academic rigour, while satisfying your own need to contribute to world knowledge in a significant way. Work through each of these planning sheets in turn and you will find that the key components of your research topic and the implications of your possible research design begin to emerge and take shape in your mind. You may find that the implications are much greater than you first supposed, and that each time you open up a new thought, many others appear. This is very common, and simply means that you should reduce the scale of your undertakings and possibly omit some aspects of your first idea in order to focus more directly on one specific and identifiable area.

Use these planning sheets to reflect on one set of ideas before using them again on a revised set of ideas. The following planning sheets are a downloadable Microsoft Word 6 file whattop:

• Topic mind-map
• Triad of major elements
• Current broad view
• Inspiration for this topic
• Current intellectual position on this topic
• Possible title
• Formulating your research question

Why this topic?

If you have a good reason for pursuing a certain line of research, it is vital to be able to communicate this, both to yourself and to others. Take some time to think about your own motivation, then more formally articulate a rationale in social academic or intellectual terms.

The following planning sheets are a downloadable Microsoft Word 6 file whytopic:

• Motivation to pursue this topic
• Rationale

How will you research this topic?

The planning sheets for this subsection help you make practical initial plans for your actual research study without losing sight of the 'big picture'.

You will note in broad terms your research design ideas so far, find out some techniques for operationalising your research question, and finally you'll make some methodological comparisons and ask yourself why you are doing it this way.

The following planning sheets are a downloadable Microsoft Word 6 file how:

• Research design ideas so far
• Operationalising your research question
• Why do it this way?

Finalising your topic choice

Use the planning sheet 'Research proposal discussion paper' to consolidate and crystallise the ideas you have articulated during previous planning sheets. When completed, you discuss your current proposal with your supervisor and interested others. Remember that you can change your mind many times, so do not necessarily think of this version as final.

Write as concisely as possible and avoid the intrusion of stray or redundant statements.

The following planning sheet is a downloadable Microsoft Word 6 file finalise:

• Research proposal discussion paper

The preparation of materials for this site was funded by a DEETYA Quality Round 3 Grant awarded to Helen Johnston, Associate Professor Margaret Sharpe and Dr Esther May, and is a result of collaboration between the Flexible Learning Centre and the Faculty of Health and Biomedical Sciences.

Project Coordinator  Helen Johnston
Writer  Trish McLaine
Online developers   Moya Costello, Loene Doube and Rebecca Miller
Designer   Kelly Martin
Produced by the FLC

Copyright ©1998 University of South Australia
Last update August 1998
URL: http://www-i.roma.unisa.edu.au/flc/sls/publictns/researchwrite/resreport.htm