what are the important of research work

2.1 Why is Research Important

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

Explain how scientific research addresses questions about behavior
Discuss how scientific research guides public policy
Appreciate how scientific research can be important in making personal decisions

Scientific research is a critical tool for successfully navigating our complex world. Without it, we would be forced to rely solely on intuition, other people’s authority, and blind luck. While many of us feel confident in our abilities to decipher and interact with the world around us, history is filled with examples of how very wrong we can be when we fail to recognize the need for evidence in supporting claims. At various times in history, we would have been certain that the sun revolved around a flat earth, that the earth’s continents did not move, and that mental illness was caused by possession (figure below). It is through systematic scientific research that we divest ourselves of our preconceived notions and superstitions and gain an objective understanding of ourselves and our world.

A skull has a large hole bored through the forehead.

Some of our ancestors, across the work and over the centuries, believed that trephination – the practice of making a hole in the skull, as shown here – allowed evil spirits to leave the body, thus curing mental illness and other diseases (credit” “taiproject/Flickr)

The goal of all scientists is to better understand the world around them. Psychologists focus their attention on understanding behavior, as well as the cognitive (mental) and physiological (body) processes that underlie behavior. In contrast to other methods that people use to understand the behavior of others, such as intuition and personal experience, the hallmark of scientific research is that there is evidence to support a claim. Scientific knowledge is empirical : It is grounded in objective, tangible evidence that can be observed time and time again, regardless of who is observing.

We can easily observe the behavior of others around us. For example, if someone is crying, we can observe that behavior. However, the reason for the behavior is more difficult to determine. Is the person crying due to being sad, in pain, or happy? Sometimes, asking about the underlying cognitions is as easy as asking the subject directly: “Why are you crying?” However, there are situations in which an individual is either uncomfortable or unwilling to answer the question honestly, or is incapable of answering. For example, infants would not be able to explain why they are crying. In other situations, it may be hard to identify exactly why you feel the way you do. Think about times when you suddenly feel annoyed after a long day. There may be a specific trigger for your annoyance (a loud noise), or you may be tired, hungry, stressed, or all of the above. Human behavior is often a complicated mix of a variety of factors. In such circumstances, the psychologist must be creative in finding ways to better understand behavior. This chapter explores how scientific knowledge is generated, and how important that knowledge is in forming decisions in our personal lives and in the public domain.

USE OF RESEARCH INFORMATION

In the meantime, we should strive to think critically about the information we encounter by exercising a degree of healthy skepticism. When someone makes a claim, we should examine the claim from a number of different perspectives: what is the expertise of the person making the claim, what might they gain if the claim is valid, does the claim seem justified given the evidence, and what do other researchers think of the claim? Science is always changing and new evidence is alwaus coming to light, thus this dash of skepticism should be applied to all research you interact with from now on. Yes, that includes the research presented in this textbook.

Evaluation of research findings can have widespread impact. Imagine that you have been elected as the governor of your state. One of your responsibilities is to manage the state budget and determine how to best spend your constituents’ tax dollars. As the new governor, you need to decide whether to continue funding the D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) program in public schools (figure below). This program typically involves police officers coming into the classroom to educate students about the dangers of becoming involved with alcohol and other drugs. According to the D.A.R.E. website (www.dare.org), this program has been very popular since its inception in 1983, and it is currently operating in 75% of school districts in the United States and in more than 40 countries worldwide. Sounds like an easy decision, right? However, on closer review, you discover that the vast majority of research into this program consistently suggests that participation has little, if any, effect on whether or not someone uses alcohol or other drugs (Clayton, Cattarello, & Johnstone, 1996; Ennett, Tobler, Ringwalt, & Flewelling, 1994; Lynam et al., 1999; Ringwalt, Ennett, & Holt, 1991). If you are committed to being a good steward of taxpayer money, will you fund this particular program, or will you try to find other programs that research has consistently demonstrated to be effective?

A D.A.R.E. poster reads “D.A.R.E. to resist drugs and violence.”

The D.A.R.E. program continues to be popular in schools around the world despite research suggesting that it is ineffective.

It is not just politicians who can benefit from using research in guiding their decisions. We all might look to research from time to time when making decisions in our lives. Imagine you just found out that a close friend has breast cancer or that one of your young relatives has recently been diagnosed with autism. In either case, you want to know which treatment options are most successful with the fewest side effects. How would you find that out? You would probably talk with a doctor or psychologist and personally review the research that has been done on various treatment options—always with a critical eye to ensure that you are as informed as possible.

In the end, research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.

THE PROCESS OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

Two types of reasoning are used to make decisions within this model: Deductive and inductive. In deductive reasoning, ideas are tested against the empirical world. Think about a detective looking for clues and evidence to test their “hunch” about whodunit. In contrast, in inductive reasoning, empirical observations lead to new ideas. In other words, inductive reasoning involves gathering facts to create or refine a theory, rather than testing the theory by gathering facts (figure below). These processes are inseparable, like inhaling and exhaling, but different research approaches place different emphasis on the deductive and inductive aspects.

A diagram has a box at the top labeled “hypothesis or general premise” and a box at the bottom labeled “empirical observations.” On the left, an arrow labeled “inductive reasoning” goes from the bottom to top box. On the right, an arrow labeled “deductive reasoning” goes from the top to the bottom box.

Psychological research relies on both inductive and deductive reasoning.

In the scientific context, deductive reasoning begins with a generalization—one hypothesis—that is then used to reach logical conclusions about the real world. If the hypothesis is correct, then the logical conclusions reached through deductive reasoning should also be correct. A deductive reasoning argument might go something like this: All living things require energy to survive (this would be your hypothesis). Ducks are living things. Therefore, ducks require energy to survive (logical conclusion). In this example, the hypothesis is correct; therefore, the conclusion is correct as well. Sometimes, however, an incorrect hypothesis may lead to a logical but incorrect conclusion. Consider the famous example from Greek philosophy. A philosopher decided that human beings were “featherless bipeds”. Using deductive reasoning, all two-legged creatures without feathers must be human, right? Diogenes the Cynic (named because he was, well, a cynic) burst into the room with a freshly plucked chicken from the market and held it up exclaiming “Behold! I have brought you a man!”

Deductive reasoning starts with a generalization that is tested against real-world observations; however, inductive reasoning moves in the opposite direction. Inductive reasoning uses empirical observations to construct broad generalizations. Unlike deductive reasoning, conclusions drawn from inductive reasoning may or may not be correct, regardless of the observations on which they are based. For example, you might be a biologist attempting to classify animals into groups. You notice that quite a large portion of animals are furry and produce milk for their young (cats, dogs, squirrels, horses, hippos, etc). Therefore, you might conclude that all mammals (the name you have chosen for this grouping) have hair and produce milk. This seems like a pretty great hypothesis that you could test with deductive reasoning. You go out an look at a whole bunch of things and stumble on an exception: The coconut. Coconuts have hair and produce milk, but they don’t “fit” your idea of what a mammal is. So, using inductive reasoning given the new evidence, you adjust your theory again for an other round of data collection. Inductive and deductive reasoning work in tandem to help build and improve scientific theories over time.

We’ve stated that theories and hypotheses are ideas, but what sort of ideas are they, exactly? A theory is a well-developed set of ideas that propose an explanation for observed phenomena. Theories are repeatedly checked against the world, but they tend to be too complex to be tested all at once. Instead, researchers create hypotheses to test specific aspects of a theory.

A hypothesis is a testable prediction about how the world will behave if our theory is correct, and it is often worded as an if-then statement (e.g., if I study all night, I will get a passing grade on the test). The hypothesis is extremely important because it bridges the gap between the realm of ideas and the real world. As specific hypotheses are tested, theories are modified and refined to reflect and incorporate the result of these tests (figure below).

A diagram has four boxes: the top is labeled “theory,” the right is labeled “hypothesis,” the bottom is labeled “research,” and the left is labeled “observation.” Arrows flow in the direction from top to right to bottom to left and back to the top, clockwise. The top right arrow is labeled “use the hypothesis to form a theory,” the bottom right arrow is labeled “design a study to test the hypothesis,” the bottom left arrow is labeled “perform the research,” and the top left arrow is labeled “create or modify the theory.”

The scientific method of research includes proposing hypotheses, conducting research, and creating or modifying theories based on results.

To see how this process works, let’s consider a specific theory and a hypothesis that might be generated from that theory. As you’ll learn in a later chapter, the James-Lange theory of emotion asserts that emotional experience relies on the physiological arousal associated with the emotional state. If you walked out of your home and discovered a very aggressive snake waiting on your doorstep, your heart would begin to race and your stomach churn. According to the James-Lange theory, these physiological changes would result in your feeling of fear. A hypothesis that could be derived from this theory might be that a person who is unaware of the physiological arousal that the sight of the snake elicits will not feel fear.

A scientific hypothesis is also falsifiable, or capable of being shown to be incorrect. Recall from the introductory chapter that Sigmund Freud had lots of interesting ideas to explain various human behaviors (figure below). However, a major criticism of Freud’s theories is that many of his ideas are not falsifiable. The essential characteristic of Freud’s building blocks of personality, the id, ego, and superego, is that they are unconscious, and therefore people can’t observe them. Because they cannot be observed or tested in any way, it is impossible to say that they don’t exist, so they cannot be considered scientific theories. Despite this, Freud’s theories are widely taught in introductory psychology texts because of their historical significance for personality psychology and psychotherapy, and these remain the root of all modern forms of therapy.

(a)A photograph shows Freud holding a cigar. (b) The mind’s conscious and unconscious states are illustrated as an iceberg floating in water. Beneath the water’s surface in the “unconscious” area are the id, ego, and superego. The area just below the water’s surface is labeled “preconscious.” The area above the water’s surface is labeled “conscious.”

Many of the specifics of (a) Freud’s theories, such ad (b) his division on the mind into the id, ego, and superego, have fallen out of favor in recent decades because they are not falsifiable (i.e., cannot be verified through scientific investigation). In broader strokes, his views set the stage for much psychological thinking today, such as the idea that some psychological process occur at the level of the unconscious.

In contrast, the James-Lange theory does generate falsifiable hypotheses, such as the one described above. Some individuals who suffer significant injuries to their spinal columns are unable to feel the bodily changes that often accompany emotional experiences. Therefore, we could test the hypothesis by determining how emotional experiences differ between individuals who have the ability to detect these changes in their physiological arousal and those who do not. In fact, this research has been conducted and while the emotional experiences of people deprived of an awareness of their physiological arousal may be less intense, they still experience emotion (Chwalisz, Diener, & Gallagher, 1988).

Scientific research’s dependence on falsifiability allows for great confidence in the information that it produces. Typically, by the time information is accepted by the scientific community, it has been tested repeatedly.

Scientists are engaged in explaining and understanding how the world around them works, and they are able to do so by coming up with theories that generate hypotheses that are testable and falsifiable. Theories that stand up to their tests are retained and refined, while those that do not are discarded or modified. IHaving good information generated from research aids in making wise decisions both in public policy and in our personal lives.

Review Questions:

1. Scientific hypotheses are ________ and falsifiable.

a. observable

b. original

c. provable

d. testable

2. ________ are defined as observable realities.

a. behaviors

c. opinions

d. theories

3. Scientific knowledge is ________.

a. intuitive

b. empirical

c. permanent

d. subjective

4. A major criticism of Freud’s early theories involves the fact that his theories ________.

a. were too limited in scope

b. were too outrageous

c. were too broad

d. were not testable

Critical Thinking Questions:

1. In this section, the D.A.R.E. program was described as an incredibly popular program in schools across the United States despite the fact that research consistently suggests that this program is largely ineffective. How might one explain this discrepancy?

2. The scientific method is often described as self-correcting and cyclical. Briefly describe your understanding of the scientific method with regard to these concepts.

Personal Application Questions:

1. Healthcare professionals cite an enormous number of health problems related to obesity, and many people have an understandable desire to attain a healthy weight. There are many diet programs, services, and products on the market to aid those who wish to lose weight. If a close friend was considering purchasing or participating in one of these products, programs, or services, how would you make sure your friend was fully aware of the potential consequences of this decision? What sort of information would you want to review before making such an investment or lifestyle change yourself?

deductive reasoning

falsifiable

hypothesis: (plural

inductive reasoning

Answers to Exercises

Review Questions:

1. There is probably tremendous political pressure to appear to be hard on drugs. Therefore, even though D.A.R.E. might be ineffective, it is a well-known program with which voters are familiar.

2. This cyclical, self-correcting process is primarily a function of the empirical nature of science. Theories are generated as explanations of real-world phenomena. From theories, specific hypotheses are developed and tested. As a function of this testing, theories will be revisited and modified or refined to generate new hypotheses that are again tested. This cyclical process ultimately allows for more and more precise (and presumably accurate) information to be collected.

deductive reasoning: results are predicted based on a general premise

empirical: grounded in objective, tangible evidence that can be observed time and time again, regardless of who is observing

fact: objective and verifiable observation, established using evidence collected through empirical research

falsifiable: able to be disproven by experimental results

hypothesis: (plural: hypotheses) tentative and testable statement about the relationship between two or more variables

inductive reasoning: conclusions are drawn from observations

opinion: personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate

theory: well-developed set of ideas that propose an explanation for observed phenomena

Share This Book

Increase Font Size

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

Virtual Tour
Staff Directory
En Español

Explaining How Research Works

We’ve heard “follow the science” a lot during the pandemic. But it seems science has taken us on a long and winding road filled with twists and turns, even changing directions at times. That’s led some people to feel they can’t trust science. But when what we know changes, it often means science is working.

Expaling How Research Works Infographic en español

Explaining the scientific process may be one way that science communicators can help maintain public trust in science. Placing research in the bigger context of its field and where it fits into the scientific process can help people better understand and interpret new findings as they emerge. A single study usually uncovers only a piece of a larger puzzle.

Questions about how the world works are often investigated on many different levels. For example, scientists can look at the different atoms in a molecule, cells in a tissue, or how different tissues or systems affect each other. Researchers often must choose one or a finite number of ways to investigate a question. It can take many different studies using different approaches to start piecing the whole picture together.

Sometimes it might seem like research results contradict each other. But often, studies are just looking at different aspects of the same problem. Researchers can also investigate a question using different techniques or timeframes. That may lead them to arrive at different conclusions from the same data.

Using the data available at the time of their study, scientists develop different explanations, or models. New information may mean that a novel model needs to be developed to account for it. The models that prevail are those that can withstand the test of time and incorporate new information. Science is a constantly evolving and self-correcting process.

Scientists gain more confidence about a model through the scientific process. They replicate each other’s work. They present at conferences. And papers undergo peer review, in which experts in the field review the work before it can be published in scientific journals. This helps ensure that the study is up to current scientific standards and maintains a level of integrity. Peer reviewers may find problems with the experiments or think different experiments are needed to justify the conclusions. They might even offer new ways to interpret the data.

It’s important for science communicators to consider which stage a study is at in the scientific process when deciding whether to cover it. Some studies are posted on preprint servers for other scientists to start weighing in on and haven’t yet been fully vetted. Results that haven't yet been subjected to scientific scrutiny should be reported on with care and context to avoid confusion or frustration from readers.

We’ve developed a one-page guide, "How Research Works: Understanding the Process of Science" to help communicators put the process of science into perspective. We hope it can serve as a useful resource to help explain why science changes—and why it’s important to expect that change. Please take a look and share your thoughts with us by sending an email to [email protected].

Below are some additional resources:

Discoveries in Basic Science: A Perfectly Imperfect Process
When Clinical Research Is in the News
What is Basic Science and Why is it Important?
What is a Research Organism?
What Are Clinical Trials and Studies?
Basic Research – Digital Media Kit
Decoding Science: How Does Science Know What It Knows? (NAS)
Can Science Help People Make Decisions ? (NAS)

Connect with Us

More Social Media from NIH

10 Reasons Why Research is Important

No matter what career field you’re in or how high up you are, there’s always more to learn . The same applies to your personal life. No matter how many experiences you have or how diverse your social circle, there are things you don’t know. Research unlocks the unknowns, lets you explore the world from different perspectives, and fuels a deeper understanding. In some areas, research is an essential part of success. In others, it may not be absolutely necessary, but it has many benefits. Here are ten reasons why research is important:

#1. Research expands your knowledge base

The most obvious reason to do research is that you’ll learn more. There’s always more to learn about a topic, even if you are already well-versed in it. If you aren’t, research allows you to build on any personal experience you have with the subject. The process of research opens up new opportunities for learning and growth.

#2. Research gives you the latest information

Research encourages you to find the most recent information available . In certain fields, especially scientific ones, there’s always new information and discoveries being made. Staying updated prevents you from falling behind and giving info that’s inaccurate or doesn’t paint the whole picture. With the latest info, you’ll be better equipped to talk about a subject and build on ideas.

#3. Research helps you know what you’re up against

In business, you’ll have competition. Researching your competitors and what they’re up to helps you formulate your plans and strategies. You can figure out what sets you apart. In other types of research, like medicine, your research might identify diseases, classify symptoms, and come up with ways to tackle them. Even if your “enemy” isn’t an actual person or competitor, there’s always some kind of antagonist force or problem that research can help you deal with.

#4. Research builds your credibility

People will take what you have to say more seriously when they can tell you’re informed. Doing research gives you a solid foundation on which you can build your ideas and opinions. You can speak with confidence about what you know is accurate. When you’ve done the research, it’s much harder for someone to poke holes in what you’re saying. Your research should be focused on the best sources. If your “research” consists of opinions from non-experts, you won’t be very credible. When your research is good, though, people are more likely to pay attention.

#5. Research helps you narrow your scope

When you’re circling a topic for the first time, you might not be exactly sure where to start. Most of the time, the amount of work ahead of you is overwhelming. Whether you’re writing a paper or formulating a business plan, it’s important to narrow the scope at some point. Research helps you identify the most unique and/or important themes. You can choose the themes that fit best with the project and its goals.

#6. Research teaches you better discernment

Doing a lot of research helps you sift through low-quality and high-quality information. The more research you do on a topic, the better you’ll get at discerning what’s accurate and what’s not. You’ll also get better at discerning the gray areas where information may be technically correct but used to draw questionable conclusions.

#7. Research introduces you to new ideas

You may already have opinions and ideas about a topic when you start researching. The more you research, the more viewpoints you’ll come across. This encourages you to entertain new ideas and perhaps take a closer look at yours. You might change your mind about something or, at least, figure out how to position your ideas as the best ones.

#8. Research helps with problem-solving

Whether it’s a personal or professional problem, it helps to look outside yourself for help. Depending on what the issue is, your research can focus on what others have done before. You might just need more information, so you can make an informed plan of attack and an informed decision. When you know you’ve collected good information, you’ll feel much more confident in your solution.

#9. Research helps you reach people

Research is used to help raise awareness of issues like climate change , racial discrimination, gender inequality , and more. Without hard facts, it’s very difficult to prove that climate change is getting worse or that gender inequality isn’t progressing as quickly as it should. The public needs to know what the facts are, so they have a clear idea of what “getting worse” or “not progressing” actually means. Research also entails going beyond the raw data and sharing real-life stories that have a more personal impact on people.

#10. Research encourages curiosity

Having curiosity and a love of learning take you far in life. Research opens you up to different opinions and new ideas. It also builds discerning and analytical skills. The research process rewards curiosity. When you’re committed to learning, you’re always in a place of growth. Curiosity is also good for your health. Studies show curiosity is associated with higher levels of positivity, better satisfaction with life, and lower anxiety.

KNOWLEDGE NETWORK

Search Engines List
Suggested Reading Library
Web Directories
Research Papers
Industry News

Become a Member
Associate Membership
Certified Membership
Membership Application
Corporate Application

CIRS Certification Program
CIRS Certification Objectives
CIRS Certification Benefits
CIRS Certification Exam
Maintain Your Certification

Upcoming Events
Live Classes
Classes Schedule
Webinars Schedules

Latest Articles
Internet Research
Search Techniques
Research Methods
Business Research
Search Engines
Research & Tools
Investigative Research
Internet Search
Work from Home
Internet Ethics
Internet Privacy

Six Reasons Why Research is Important

Everyone conducts research in some form or another from a young age, whether news, books, or browsing the Internet. Internet users come across thoughts, ideas, or perspectives - the curiosity that drives the desire to explore. However, when research is essential to make practical decisions, the nature of the study alters - it all depends on its application and purpose. For instance, skilled research offered as a research paper service has a definite objective, and it is focused and organized. Professional research helps derive inferences and conclusions from solving problems. visit the HB tool services for the amazing research tools that will help to solve your problems regarding the research on any project.

What is the Importance of Research?

The primary goal of the research is to guide action, gather evidence for theories, and contribute to the growth of knowledge in data analysis. This article discusses the importance of research and the multiple reasons why it is beneficial to everyone, not just students and scientists.

On the other hand, research is important in business decision-making because it can assist in making better decisions when combined with their experience and intuition.

Reasons for the Importance of Research

Acquire Knowledge Effectively
Research helps in problem-solving
Provides the latest information
Builds credibility
Helps in business success
Discover and Seize opportunities

1- Acquire Knowledge Efficiently through Research

The most apparent reason to conduct research is to understand more. Even if you think you know everything there is to know about a subject, there is always more to learn. Research helps you expand on any prior knowledge you have of the subject. The research process creates new opportunities for learning and progress.

2- Research Helps in Problem-solving

Problem-solving can be divided into several components, which require knowledge and analysis, for example, identification of issues, cause identification, identifying potential solutions, decision to take action, monitoring and evaluation of activity and outcomes.

You may just require additional knowledge to formulate an informed strategy and make an informed decision. When you know you've gathered reliable data, you'll be a lot more confident in your answer.

3- Research Provides the Latest Information

Research enables you to seek out the most up-to-date facts. There is always new knowledge and discoveries in various sectors, particularly scientific ones. Staying updated keeps you from falling behind and providing inaccurate or incomplete information. You'll be better prepared to discuss a topic and build on ideas if you have the most up-to-date information. With the help of tools and certifications such as CIRS , you may learn internet research skills quickly and easily. Internet research can provide instant, global access to information.

4- Research Builds Credibility

Research provides a solid basis for formulating thoughts and views. You can speak confidently about something you know to be true. It's much more difficult for someone to find flaws in your arguments after you've finished your tasks. In your study, you should prioritize the most reputable sources. Your research should focus on the most reliable sources. You won't be credible if your "research" comprises non-experts' opinions. People are more inclined to pay attention if your research is excellent.

5- Research Helps in Business Success

R&D might also help you gain a competitive advantage. Finding ways to make things run more smoothly and differentiate a company's products from those of its competitors can help to increase a company's market worth.

6- Research Discover and Seize Opportunities

People can maximize their potential and achieve their goals through various opportunities provided by research. These include getting jobs, scholarships, educational subsidies, projects, commercial collaboration, and budgeted travel. Research is essential for anyone looking for work or a change of environment. Unemployed people will have a better chance of finding potential employers through job advertisements or agencies.

How to Improve Your Research Skills

Start with the big picture and work your way down.

It might be hard to figure out where to start when you start researching. There's nothing wrong with a simple internet search to get you started. Online resources like Google and Wikipedia are a great way to get a general idea of a subject, even though they aren't always correct. They usually give a basic overview with a short history and any important points.

Identify Reliable Source

Not every source is reliable, so it's critical that you can tell the difference between the good ones and the bad ones. To find a reliable source, use your analytical and critical thinking skills and ask yourself the following questions: Is this source consistent with other sources I've discovered? Is the author a subject matter expert? Is there a conflict of interest in the author's point of view on this topic?

Validate Information from Various Sources

Take in new information.

The purpose of research is to find answers to your questions, not back up what you already assume. Only looking for confirmation is a minimal way to research because it forces you to pick and choose what information you get and stops you from getting the most accurate picture of the subject. When you do research, keep an open mind to learn as much as possible.

Facilitates Learning Process

Learning new things and implementing them in daily life can be frustrating. Finding relevant and credible information requires specialized training and web search skills due to the sheer enormity of the Internet and the rapid growth of indexed web pages. On the other hand, short courses and Certifications like CIRS make the research process more accessible. CIRS Certification offers complete knowledge from beginner to expert level. You can become a Certified Professional Researcher and get a high-paying job, but you'll also be much more efficient and skilled at filtering out reliable data. You can learn more about becoming a Certified Professional Researcher.

Stay Organized

You'll see a lot of different material during the process of gathering data, from web pages to PDFs to videos. You must keep all of this information organized in some way so that you don't lose anything or forget to mention something properly. There are many ways to keep your research project organized, but here are a few of the most common: Learning Management Software , Bookmarks in your browser, index cards, and a bibliography that you can add to as you go are all excellent tools for writing.

Make Use of the library's Resources

If you still have questions about researching, don't worry—even if you're not a student performing academic or course-related research, there are many resources available to assist you. Many high school and university libraries, in reality, provide resources not only for staff and students but also for the general public. Look for research guidelines or access to specific databases on the library's website. Association of Internet Research Specialists enjoys sharing informational content such as research-related articles , research papers , specialized search engines list compiled from various sources, and contributions from our members and in-house experts.

of Conducting Research

Latest from erin r. goodrich.

Enhancing Efficiency: The Role of Technology in Personal Injury Case Management
The Evolution and Future of Workplace Benefit Administration
10 Best People Search Engines and Websites in 2022

Live Classes Schedule

JUN 14 CIRS Certification Internet Research Training Program Live Classes Online
JUN 14 Web Search Methods & Techniques Live Training Live Classes Online

World's leading professional association of Internet Research Specialists - We deliver Knowledge, Education, Training, and Certification in the field of Professional Online Research. The AOFIRS is considered a major contributor in improving Web Search Skills and recognizes Online Research work as a full-time occupation for those that use the Internet as their primary source of information.

Get Exclusive Research Tips in Your Inbox

Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Advertising Opportunities
Knowledge Network

What Is Research and Why We Do It

First Online: 23 June 2020

Cite this chapter

Carlo Ghezzi 2

2995 Accesses

2 Altmetric

The notions of science and scientific research are discussed and the motivations for doing research are analyzed. Research can span a broad range of approaches, from purely theoretical to practice-oriented; different approaches often coexist and fertilize each other. Research ignites human progress and societal change. In turn, society drives and supports research. The specific role of research in Informatics is discussed. Informatics is driving the current transition towards the new digital society in which we will live in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Available as EPUB and PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

In [ 34 ], P.E. Medawar discusses what he calls the “snobismus” of pure versus applied science. In his words, this is one of the most damaging forms of snobbism, which draws a class distinction between pure and applied science.

Originality, rigor, and significance have been defined and used as the key criteria to evaluate research outputs by the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) [ 46 ]. A research evaluation exercise has been performed periodically since 1986 on UK higher education institutions and their research outputs have been rated according to their originality, rigor, and significance.

The importance of realizing that “we don’t know” was apparently first stated by Socrates, according to Plato’s account of his thought. This is condensed in the famous paradox “I know that I don’t know.”

This view applies mainly to natural and physical sciences.

Roy Amara was President of the Institute for Future, a USA-based think tank, from 1971 until 1990.

The Turing Award is generally recognized as the Nobel prize of Informatics.

See http://uis.unesco.org/apps/visualisations/research-and-development-spending/ .

Israel is a very good example. Investments in research resulted in a proliferation of new, cutting-edge enterprises. The term start-up nation has been coined by Dan Senor and Saul Singer in their successful book [ 51 ] to characterize this phenomenon.

https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/societal-challenges .

https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/cross-cutting-activities-focus-areas .

This figure has been adapted from a presentation by A. Fuggetta, which describes the mission of Cefriel, an Italian institution with a similar role of Fraunhofer, on a smaller scale.

The ERC takes an ecumenical approach and calls the research sector “Computer Science and Informatics.”

I discuss here the effect of “big data” on research, although most sectors of society—industry, finance, health, …—are also deeply affected.

Carayannis, E., Campbell, D.: Mode 3 knowledge production in quadruple helix innovation systems. In: E. Carayannis, D. Campbell (eds.) Mode 3 Knowledge Production in Quadruple Helix Innovation Systems: 21st-Century Democracy, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship for Development. SpringerBriefs in Business, New York, NY (2012)

Google Scholar

Etzkowitz, H., Leydesdorff, L.: The triple helix – university-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST Review 14 (1), 14–19 (1995)

Harari, Y.: Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. Random House (2014). URL https://books.google.it/books?id=1EiJAwAAQBAJ

Harari, Y.: Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. Random House (2016). URL https://books.google.it/books?id=dWYyCwAAQBAJ

Hopcroft, J.E., Motwani, R., Ullman, J.D.: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation (3rd Edition). Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., USA (2006)

MATH Google Scholar

Medawar, P.: Advice To A Young Scientist. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation series. Basic Books (2008)

OECD: Frascati Manual. OECD Publishing (2015). https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-en . URL https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/publication/9789264239012-en

REF2019/2: Panel criteria and working methods (2019). URL https://www.ref.ac.uk/media/1084/ref-2019_02-panel-criteria-and-working-methods.pdf

Senor, D., Singer, S.: Start-Up Nation: The Story of Israel’s Economic Miracle. McClelland & Stewart, Toronto, Canada (2011)

Stokes, D.E.: Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, D.C. (1997)

Thurston, R.H.: The growth of the steam engine. Popular Science Monthly 12 (1877)

Vardi, M.Y.: The long game of research. Commun. ACM 62 (9), 7–7 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3352489 . URL http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3352489

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy

Carlo Ghezzi

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlo Ghezzi .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Ghezzi, C. (2020). What Is Research and Why We Do It. In: Being a Researcher. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45157-8_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45157-8_1

Published : 23 June 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-45156-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-45157-8

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

2.1 Why Is Research Important?

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

Explain how scientific research addresses questions about behavior
Discuss how scientific research guides public policy
Appreciate how scientific research can be important in making personal decisions

Scientific research is a critical tool for successfully navigating our complex world. Without it, we would be forced to rely solely on intuition, other people’s authority, and blind luck. While many of us feel confident in our abilities to decipher and interact with the world around us, history is filled with examples of how very wrong we can be when we fail to recognize the need for evidence in supporting claims. At various times in history, we would have been certain that the sun revolved around a flat earth, that the earth’s continents did not move, and that mental illness was caused by possession ( Figure 2.2 ). It is through systematic scientific research that we divest ourselves of our preconceived notions and superstitions and gain an objective understanding of ourselves and our world.

While behavior is observable, the mind is not. If someone is crying, we can see behavior. However, the reason for the behavior is more difficult to determine. Is the person crying due to being sad, in pain, or happy? Sometimes we can learn the reason for someone’s behavior by simply asking a question, like “Why are you crying?” However, there are situations in which an individual is either uncomfortable or unwilling to answer the question honestly, or is incapable of answering. For example, infants would not be able to explain why they are crying. In such circumstances, the psychologist must be creative in finding ways to better understand behavior. This chapter explores how scientific knowledge is generated, and how important that knowledge is in forming decisions in our personal lives and in the public domain.

Use of Research Information

Trying to determine which theories are and are not accepted by the scientific community can be difficult, especially in an area of research as broad as psychology. More than ever before, we have an incredible amount of information at our fingertips, and a simple internet search on any given research topic might result in a number of contradictory studies. In these cases, we are witnessing the scientific community going through the process of reaching a consensus, and it could be quite some time before a consensus emerges. For example, the explosion in our use of technology has led researchers to question whether this ultimately helps or hinders us. The use and implementation of technology in educational settings has become widespread over the last few decades. Researchers are coming to different conclusions regarding the use of technology. To illustrate this point, a study investigating a smartphone app targeting surgery residents (graduate students in surgery training) found that the use of this app can increase student engagement and raise test scores (Shaw & Tan, 2015). Conversely, another study found that the use of technology in undergraduate student populations had negative impacts on sleep, communication, and time management skills (Massimini & Peterson, 2009). Until sufficient amounts of research have been conducted, there will be no clear consensus on the effects that technology has on a student's acquisition of knowledge, study skills, and mental health.

In the meantime, we should strive to think critically about the information we encounter by exercising a degree of healthy skepticism. When someone makes a claim, we should examine the claim from a number of different perspectives: what is the expertise of the person making the claim, what might they gain if the claim is valid, does the claim seem justified given the evidence, and what do other researchers think of the claim? This is especially important when we consider how much information in advertising campaigns and on the internet claims to be based on “scientific evidence” when in actuality it is a belief or perspective of just a few individuals trying to sell a product or draw attention to their perspectives.

We should be informed consumers of the information made available to us because decisions based on this information have significant consequences. One such consequence can be seen in politics and public policy. Imagine that you have been elected as the governor of your state. One of your responsibilities is to manage the state budget and determine how to best spend your constituents’ tax dollars. As the new governor, you need to decide whether to continue funding early intervention programs. These programs are designed to help children who come from low-income backgrounds, have special needs, or face other disadvantages. These programs may involve providing a wide variety of services to maximize the children's development and position them for optimal levels of success in school and later in life (Blann, 2005). While such programs sound appealing, you would want to be sure that they also proved effective before investing additional money in these programs. Fortunately, psychologists and other scientists have conducted vast amounts of research on such programs and, in general, the programs are found to be effective (Neil & Christensen, 2009; Peters-Scheffer, Didden, Korzilius, & Sturmey, 2011). While not all programs are equally effective, and the short-term effects of many such programs are more pronounced, there is reason to believe that many of these programs produce long-term benefits for participants (Barnett, 2011). If you are committed to being a good steward of taxpayer money, you would want to look at research. Which programs are most effective? What characteristics of these programs make them effective? Which programs promote the best outcomes? After examining the research, you would be best equipped to make decisions about which programs to fund.

Link to Learning

Watch this video about early childhood program effectiveness to learn how scientists evaluate effectiveness and how best to invest money into programs that are most effective.

Ultimately, it is not just politicians who can benefit from using research in guiding their decisions. We all might look to research from time to time when making decisions in our lives. Imagine that your sister, Maria, expresses concern about her two-year-old child, Umberto. Umberto does not speak as much or as clearly as the other children in his daycare or others in the family. Umberto's pediatrician undertakes some screening and recommends an evaluation by a speech pathologist, but does not refer Maria to any other specialists. Maria is concerned that Umberto's speech delays are signs of a developmental disorder, but Umberto's pediatrician does not; she sees indications of differences in Umberto's jaw and facial muscles. Hearing this, you do some internet searches, but you are overwhelmed by the breadth of information and the wide array of sources. You see blog posts, top-ten lists, advertisements from healthcare providers, and recommendations from several advocacy organizations. Why are there so many sites? Which are based in research, and which are not?

NOTABLE RESEARCHERS

Psychological research has a long history involving important figures from diverse backgrounds. While the introductory chapter discussed several researchers who made significant contributions to the discipline, there are many more individuals who deserve attention in considering how psychology has advanced as a science through their work ( Figure 2.3 ). For instance, Margaret Floy Washburn (1871–1939) was the first woman to earn a PhD in psychology. Her research focused on animal behavior and cognition (Margaret Floy Washburn, PhD, n.d.). Mary Whiton Calkins (1863–1930) was a preeminent first-generation American psychologist who opposed the behaviorist movement, conducted significant research into memory, and established one of the earliest experimental psychology labs in the United States (Mary Whiton Calkins, n.d.).

Francis Sumner (1895–1954) was the first African American to receive a PhD in psychology in 1920. His dissertation focused on issues related to psychoanalysis. Sumner also had research interests in racial bias and educational justice. Sumner was one of the founders of Howard University’s department of psychology, and because of his accomplishments, he is sometimes referred to as the “Father of Black Psychology.” Thirteen years later, Inez Beverly Prosser (1895–1934) became the first African American woman to receive a PhD in psychology. Prosser’s research highlighted issues related to education in segregated versus integrated schools, and ultimately, her work was very influential in the hallmark Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court ruling that segregation of public schools was unconstitutional (Ethnicity and Health in America Series: Featured Psychologists, n.d.).

Although the establishment of psychology’s scientific roots occurred first in Europe and the United States, it did not take much time until researchers from around the world began to establish their own laboratories and research programs. For example, some of the first experimental psychology laboratories in South America were founded by Horatio Piñero (1869–1919) at two institutions in Buenos Aires, Argentina (Godoy & Brussino, 2010). In India, Gunamudian David Boaz (1908–1965) and Narendra Nath Sen Gupta (1889–1944) established the first independent departments of psychology at the University of Madras and the University of Calcutta, respectively. These developments provided an opportunity for Indian researchers to make important contributions to the field (Gunamudian David Boaz, n.d.; Narendra Nath Sen Gupta, n.d.).

When the American Psychological Association (APA) was first founded in 1892, all of the members were White males (Women and Minorities in Psychology, n.d.). However, by 1905, Mary Whiton Calkins was elected as the first female president of the APA, and by 1946, nearly one-quarter of American psychologists were female. Psychology became a popular degree option for students enrolled in the nation’s historically Black higher education institutions, increasing the number of Black Americans who went on to become psychologists. Given demographic shifts occurring in the United States and increased access to higher educational opportunities among historically underrepresented populations, there is reason to hope that the diversity of the field will increasingly match the larger population, and that the research contributions made by the psychologists of the future will better serve people of all backgrounds (Women and Minorities in Psychology, n.d.).

The Process of Scientific Research

Scientific knowledge is advanced through a process known as the scientific method . Basically, ideas (in the form of theories and hypotheses) are tested against the real world (in the form of empirical observations), and those empirical observations lead to more ideas that are tested against the real world, and so on. In this sense, the scientific process is circular. The types of reasoning within the circle are called deductive and inductive. In deductive reasoning , ideas are tested in the real world; in inductive reasoning , real-world observations lead to new ideas ( Figure 2.4 ). These processes are inseparable, like inhaling and exhaling, but different research approaches place different emphasis on the deductive and inductive aspects.

In the scientific context, deductive reasoning begins with a generalization—one hypothesis—that is then used to reach logical conclusions about the real world. If the hypothesis is correct, then the logical conclusions reached through deductive reasoning should also be correct. A deductive reasoning argument might go something like this: All living things require energy to survive (this would be your hypothesis). Ducks are living things. Therefore, ducks require energy to survive (logical conclusion). In this example, the hypothesis is correct; therefore, the conclusion is correct as well. Sometimes, however, an incorrect hypothesis may lead to a logical but incorrect conclusion. Consider this argument: all ducks are born with the ability to see. Quackers is a duck. Therefore, Quackers was born with the ability to see. Scientists use deductive reasoning to empirically test their hypotheses. Returning to the example of the ducks, researchers might design a study to test the hypothesis that if all living things require energy to survive, then ducks will be found to require energy to survive.

Deductive reasoning starts with a generalization that is tested against real-world observations; however, inductive reasoning moves in the opposite direction. Inductive reasoning uses empirical observations to construct broad generalizations. Unlike deductive reasoning, conclusions drawn from inductive reasoning may or may not be correct, regardless of the observations on which they are based. For instance, you may notice that your favorite fruits—apples, bananas, and oranges—all grow on trees; therefore, you assume that all fruit must grow on trees. This would be an example of inductive reasoning, and, clearly, the existence of strawberries, blueberries, and kiwi demonstrate that this generalization is not correct despite it being based on a number of direct observations. Scientists use inductive reasoning to formulate theories, which in turn generate hypotheses that are tested with deductive reasoning. In the end, science involves both deductive and inductive processes.

For example, case studies, which you will read about in the next section, are heavily weighted on the side of empirical observations. Thus, case studies are closely associated with inductive processes as researchers gather massive amounts of observations and seek interesting patterns (new ideas) in the data. Experimental research, on the other hand, puts great emphasis on deductive reasoning.

We’ve stated that theories and hypotheses are ideas, but what sort of ideas are they, exactly? A theory is a well-developed set of ideas that propose an explanation for observed phenomena. Theories are repeatedly checked against the world, but they tend to be too complex to be tested all at once; instead, researchers create hypotheses to test specific aspects of a theory.

A hypothesis is a testable prediction about how the world will behave if our idea is correct, and it is often worded as an if-then statement (e.g., if I study all night, I will get a passing grade on the test). The hypothesis is extremely important because it bridges the gap between the realm of ideas and the real world. As specific hypotheses are tested, theories are modified and refined to reflect and incorporate the result of these tests Figure 2.5 .

A scientific hypothesis is also falsifiable , or capable of being shown to be incorrect. Recall from the introductory chapter that Sigmund Freud had lots of interesting ideas to explain various human behaviors ( Figure 2.6 ). However, a major criticism of Freud’s theories is that many of his ideas are not falsifiable; for example, it is impossible to imagine empirical observations that would disprove the existence of the id, the ego, and the superego—the three elements of personality described in Freud’s theories. Despite this, Freud’s theories are widely taught in introductory psychology texts because of their historical significance for personality psychology and psychotherapy, and these remain the root of all modern forms of therapy.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/1-introduction

Authors: Rose M. Spielman, William J. Jenkins, Marilyn D. Lovett
Publisher/website: OpenStax
Book title: Psychology 2e
Publication date: Apr 22, 2020
Location: Houston, Texas
Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/1-introduction
Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/2-1-why-is-research-important

© Jan 6, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

What Is the Importance of Research? 5 Reasons Why Research is Critical

by Logan Bessant | Nov 16, 2021 | Science

Most of us appreciate that research is a crucial part of medical advancement. But what exactly is the importance of research? In short, it is critical in the development of new medicines as well as ensuring that existing treatments are used to their full potential.

Research can bridge knowledge gaps and change the way healthcare practitioners work by providing solutions to previously unknown questions.

In this post, we’ll discuss the importance of research and its impact on medical breakthroughs.

The Importance Of Health Research

The purpose of studying is to gather information and evidence, inform actions, and contribute to the overall knowledge of a certain field. None of this is possible without research.

Understanding how to conduct research and the importance of it may seem like a very simple idea to some, but in reality, it’s more than conducting a quick browser search and reading a few chapters in a textbook.

No matter what career field you are in, there is always more to learn. Even for people who hold a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in their field of study, there is always some sort of unknown that can be researched. Delving into this unlocks the unknowns, letting you explore the world from different perspectives and fueling a deeper understanding of how the universe works.

To make things a little more specific, this concept can be clearly applied in any healthcare scenario. Health research has an incredibly high value to society as it provides important information about disease trends and risk factors, outcomes of treatments, patterns of care, and health care costs and use. All of these factors as well as many more are usually researched through a clinical trial.

What Is The Importance Of Clinical Research?

Clinical trials are a type of research that provides information about a new test or treatment. They are usually carried out to find out what, or if, there are any effects of these procedures or drugs on the human body.

All legitimate clinical trials are carefully designed, reviewed and completed, and need to be approved by professionals before they can begin. They also play a vital part in the advancement of medical research including:

Providing new and good information on which types of drugs are more effective.
Bringing new treatments such as medicines, vaccines and devices into the field.
Testing the safety and efficacy of a new drug before it is brought to market and used in clinical practice.
Giving the opportunity for more effective treatments to benefit millions of lives both now and in the future.
Enhancing health, lengthening life, and reducing the burdens of illness and disability.

This all plays back to clinical research as it opens doors to advancing prevention, as well as providing treatments and cures for diseases and disabilities. Clinical trial volunteer participants are essential to this progress which further supports the need for the importance of research to be well-known amongst healthcare professionals, students and the general public.

The image shows a researchers hand holding a magnifying glass to signify the importance of research.

Five Reasons Why Research is Critical

Research is vital for almost everyone irrespective of their career field. From doctors to lawyers to students to scientists, research is the key to better work.

Increases quality of life

Research is the backbone of any major scientific or medical breakthrough. None of the advanced treatments or life-saving discoveries used to treat patients today would be available if it wasn’t for the detailed and intricate work carried out by scientists, doctors and healthcare professionals over the past decade.

This improves quality of life because it can help us find out important facts connected to the researched subject. For example, universities across the globe are now studying a wide variety of things from how technology can help breed healthier livestock, to how dance can provide long-term benefits to people living with Parkinson’s.

For both of these studies, quality of life is improved. Farmers can use technology to breed healthier livestock which in turn provides them with a better turnover, and people who suffer from Parkinson’s disease can find a way to reduce their symptoms and ease their stress.

Research is a catalyst for solving the world’s most pressing issues. Even though the complexity of these issues evolves over time, they always provide a glimmer of hope to improving lives and making processes simpler.

Builds up credibility

People are willing to listen and trust someone with new information on one condition – it’s backed up. And that’s exactly where research comes in. Conducting studies on new and unfamiliar subjects, and achieving the desired or expected outcome, can help people accept the unknown.

However, this goes without saying that your research should be focused on the best sources. It is easy for people to poke holes in your findings if your studies have not been carried out correctly, or there is no reliable data to back them up.

This way once you have done completed your research, you can speak with confidence about your findings within your field of study.

Drives progress forward

It is with thanks to scientific research that many diseases once thought incurable, now have treatments. For example, before the 1930s, anyone who contracted a bacterial infection had a high probability of death. There simply was no treatment for even the mildest of infections as, at the time, it was thought that nothing could kill bacteria in the gut.

When antibiotics were discovered and researched in 1928, it was considered one of the biggest breakthroughs in the medical field. This goes to show how much research drives progress forward, and how it is also responsible for the evolution of technology .

Today vaccines, diagnoses and treatments can all be simplified with the progression of medical research, making us question just what research can achieve in the future.

Engages curiosity

The acts of searching for information and thinking critically serve as food for the brain, allowing our inherent creativity and logic to remain active. Aside from the fact that this curiosity plays such a huge part within research, it is also proven that exercising our minds can reduce anxiety and our chances of developing mental illnesses in the future.

Without our natural thirst and our constant need to ask ‘why?’ and ‘how?’ many important theories would not have been put forward and life-changing discoveries would not have been made. The best part is that the research process itself rewards this curiosity.

Research opens you up to different opinions and new ideas which can take a proposed question and turn into a real-life concept. It also builds discerning and analytical skills which are always beneficial in many career fields – not just scientific ones.

Increases awareness

The main goal of any research study is to increase awareness, whether it’s contemplating new concepts with peers from work or attracting the attention of the general public surrounding a certain issue.

Around the globe, research is used to help raise awareness of issues like climate change, racial discrimination, and gender inequality. Without consistent and reliable studies to back up these issues, it would be hard to convenience people that there is a problem that needs to be solved in the first place.

The problem is that social media has become a place where fake news spreads like a wildfire, and with so many incorrect facts out there it can be hard to know who to trust. Assessing the integrity of the news source and checking for similar news on legitimate media outlets can help prove right from wrong.

This can pinpoint fake research articles and raises awareness of just how important fact-checking can be.

The Importance Of Research To Students

It is not a hidden fact that research can be mentally draining, which is why most students avoid it like the plague. But the matter of fact is that no matter which career path you choose to go down, research will inevitably be a part of it.

But why is research so important to students ? The truth is without research, any intellectual growth is pretty much impossible. It acts as a knowledge-building tool that can guide you up to the different levels of learning. Even if you are an expert in your field, there is always more to uncover, or if you are studying an entirely new topic, research can help you build a unique perspective about it.

For example, if you are looking into a topic for the first time, it might be confusing knowing where to begin. Most of the time you have an overwhelming amount of information to sort through whether that be reading through scientific journals online or getting through a pile of textbooks. Research helps to narrow down to the most important points you need so you are able to find what you need to succeed quickly and easily.

It can also open up great doors in the working world. Employers, especially those in the scientific and medical fields, are always looking for skilled people to hire. Undertaking research and completing studies within your academic phase can show just how multi-skilled you are and give you the resources to tackle any tasks given to you in the workplace.

The Importance Of Research Methodology

There are many different types of research that can be done, each one with its unique methodology and features that have been designed to use in specific settings.

When showing your research to others, they will want to be guaranteed that your proposed inquiry needs asking, and that your methodology is equipt to answer your inquiry and will convey the results you’re looking for.

That’s why it’s so important to choose the right methodology for your study. Knowing what the different types of research are and what each of them focuses on can allow you to plan your project to better utilise the most appropriate methodologies and techniques available. Here are some of the most common types:

Theoretical Research: This attempts to answer a question based on the unknown. This could include studying phenomena or ideas whose conclusions may not have any immediate real-world application. Commonly used in physics and astronomy applications.
Applied Research: Mainly for development purposes, this seeks to solve a practical problem that draws on theory to generate practical scientific knowledge. Commonly used in STEM and medical fields.
Exploratory Research: Used to investigate a problem that is not clearly defined, this type of research can be used to establish cause-and-effect relationships. It can be applied in a wide range of fields from business to literature.
Correlational Research: This identifies the relationship between two or more variables to see if and how they interact with each other. Very commonly used in psychological and statistical applications.

The Importance Of Qualitative Research

This type of research is most commonly used in scientific and social applications. It collects, compares and interprets information to specifically address the “how” and “why” research questions.

Qualitative research allows you to ask questions that cannot be easily put into numbers to understand human experience because you’re not limited by survey instruments with a fixed set of possible responses.

Information can be gathered in numerous ways including interviews, focus groups and ethnographic research which is then all reported in the language of the informant instead of statistical analyses.

This type of research is important because they do not usually require a hypothesis to be carried out. Instead, it is an open-ended research approach that can be adapted and changed while the study is ongoing. This enhances the quality of the data and insights generated and creates a much more unique set of data to analyse.

The Process Of Scientific Research

No matter the type of research completed, it will be shared and read by others. Whether this is with colleagues at work, peers at university, or whilst it’s being reviewed and repeated during secondary analysis.

A reliable procedure is necessary in order to obtain the best information which is why it’s important to have a plan. Here are the six basic steps that apply in any research process.

Observation and asking questions: Seeing a phenomenon and asking yourself ‘How, What, When, Who, Which, Why, or Where?’. It is best that these questions are measurable and answerable through experimentation.
Gathering information: Doing some background research to learn what is already known about the topic, and what you need to find out.
Forming a hypothesis: Constructing a tentative statement to study.
Testing the hypothesis: Conducting an experiment to test the accuracy of your statement. This is a way to gather data about your predictions and should be easy to repeat.
Making conclusions: Analysing the data from the experiment(s) and drawing conclusions about whether they support or contradict your hypothesis.
Reporting: Presenting your findings in a clear way to communicate with others. This could include making a video, writing a report or giving a presentation to illustrate your findings.

Although most scientists and researchers use this method, it may be tweaked between one study and another. Skipping or repeating steps is common within, however the core principles of the research process still apply.

By clearly explaining the steps and procedures used throughout the study, other researchers can then replicate the results. This is especially beneficial for peer reviews that try to replicate the results to ensure that the study is sound.

What Is The Importance Of Research In Everyday Life?

Conducting a research study and comparing it to how important it is in everyday life are two very different things.

Carrying out research allows you to gain a deeper understanding of science and medicine by developing research questions and letting your curiosity blossom. You can experience what it is like to work in a lab and learn about the whole reasoning behind the scientific process. But how does that impact everyday life?

Simply put, it allows us to disprove lies and support truths. This can help society to develop a confident attitude and not believe everything as easily, especially with the rise of fake news.

Research is the best and reliable way to understand and act on the complexities of various issues that we as humans are facing. From technology to healthcare to defence to climate change, carrying out studies is the only safe and reliable way to face our future.

Not only does research sharpen our brains, but also helps us to understand various issues of life in a much larger manner, always leaving us questioning everything and fuelling our need for answers.

What is STEM education?
How Stem Education Improves Student Learning
What Are the Three Domains for the Roles of Technology for Teaching and Learning?
Why Is FIDO2 Secure?

Featured Articles

The Significance of Workplace Incident Reporting Software

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

11.1 The Purpose of Research Writing

Learning objectives.

Identify reasons to research writing projects.
Outline the steps of the research writing process.

Why was the Great Wall of China built? What have scientists learned about the possibility of life on Mars? What roles did women play in the American Revolution? How does the human brain create, store, and retrieve memories? Who invented the game of football, and how has it changed over the years?

You may know the answers to these questions off the top of your head. If you are like most people, however, you find answers to tough questions like these by searching the Internet, visiting the library, or asking others for information. To put it simply, you perform research.

Whether you are a scientist, an artist, a paralegal, or a parent, you probably perform research in your everyday life. When your boss, your instructor, or a family member asks you a question that you do not know the answer to, you locate relevant information, analyze your findings, and share your results. Locating, analyzing, and sharing information are key steps in the research process, and in this chapter, you will learn more about each step. By developing your research writing skills, you will prepare yourself to answer any question no matter how challenging.

Reasons for Research

When you perform research, you are essentially trying to solve a mystery—you want to know how something works or why something happened. In other words, you want to answer a question that you (and other people) have about the world. This is one of the most basic reasons for performing research.

But the research process does not end when you have solved your mystery. Imagine what would happen if a detective collected enough evidence to solve a criminal case, but she never shared her solution with the authorities. Presenting what you have learned from research can be just as important as performing the research. Research results can be presented in a variety of ways, but one of the most popular—and effective—presentation forms is the research paper . A research paper presents an original thesis, or purpose statement, about a topic and develops that thesis with information gathered from a variety of sources.

If you are curious about the possibility of life on Mars, for example, you might choose to research the topic. What will you do, though, when your research is complete? You will need a way to put your thoughts together in a logical, coherent manner. You may want to use the facts you have learned to create a narrative or to support an argument. And you may want to show the results of your research to your friends, your teachers, or even the editors of magazines and journals. Writing a research paper is an ideal way to organize thoughts, craft narratives or make arguments based on research, and share your newfound knowledge with the world.

Write a paragraph about a time when you used research in your everyday life. Did you look for the cheapest way to travel from Houston to Denver? Did you search for a way to remove gum from the bottom of your shoe? In your paragraph, explain what you wanted to research, how you performed the research, and what you learned as a result.

Research Writing and the Academic Paper

No matter what field of study you are interested in, you will most likely be asked to write a research paper during your academic career. For example, a student in an art history course might write a research paper about an artist’s work. Similarly, a student in a psychology course might write a research paper about current findings in childhood development.

Having to write a research paper may feel intimidating at first. After all, researching and writing a long paper requires a lot of time, effort, and organization. However, writing a research paper can also be a great opportunity to explore a topic that is particularly interesting to you. The research process allows you to gain expertise on a topic of your choice, and the writing process helps you remember what you have learned and understand it on a deeper level.

Research Writing at Work

Knowing how to write a good research paper is a valuable skill that will serve you well throughout your career. Whether you are developing a new product, studying the best way to perform a procedure, or learning about challenges and opportunities in your field of employment, you will use research techniques to guide your exploration. You may even need to create a written report of your findings. And because effective communication is essential to any company, employers seek to hire people who can write clearly and professionally.

Writing at Work

Take a few minutes to think about each of the following careers. How might each of these professionals use researching and research writing skills on the job?

Medical laboratory technician
Small business owner
Information technology professional
Freelance magazine writer

A medical laboratory technician or information technology professional might do research to learn about the latest technological developments in either of these fields. A small business owner might conduct research to learn about the latest trends in his or her industry. A freelance magazine writer may need to research a given topic to write an informed, up-to-date article.

Think about the job of your dreams. How might you use research writing skills to perform that job? Create a list of ways in which strong researching, organizing, writing, and critical thinking skills could help you succeed at your dream job. How might these skills help you obtain that job?

Steps of the Research Writing Process

How does a research paper grow from a folder of brainstormed notes to a polished final draft? No two projects are identical, but most projects follow a series of six basic steps.

These are the steps in the research writing process:

Choose a topic.
Plan and schedule time to research and write.
Conduct research.
Organize research and ideas.
Draft your paper.
Revise and edit your paper.

Each of these steps will be discussed in more detail later in this chapter. For now, though, we will take a brief look at what each step involves.

Step 1: Choosing a Topic

As you may recall from Chapter 8 “The Writing Process: How Do I Begin?” , to narrow the focus of your topic, you may try freewriting exercises, such as brainstorming. You may also need to ask a specific research question —a broad, open-ended question that will guide your research—as well as propose a possible answer, or a working thesis . You may use your research question and your working thesis to create a research proposal . In a research proposal, you present your main research question, any related subquestions you plan to explore, and your working thesis.

Step 2: Planning and Scheduling

Before you start researching your topic, take time to plan your researching and writing schedule. Research projects can take days, weeks, or even months to complete. Creating a schedule is a good way to ensure that you do not end up being overwhelmed by all the work you have to do as the deadline approaches.

During this step of the process, it is also a good idea to plan the resources and organizational tools you will use to keep yourself on track throughout the project. Flowcharts, calendars, and checklists can all help you stick to your schedule. See Chapter 11 “Writing from Research: What Will I Learn?” , Section 11.2 “Steps in Developing a Research Proposal” for an example of a research schedule.

Step 3: Conducting Research

When going about your research, you will likely use a variety of sources—anything from books and periodicals to video presentations and in-person interviews.

Your sources will include both primary sources and secondary sources . Primary sources provide firsthand information or raw data. For example, surveys, in-person interviews, and historical documents are primary sources. Secondary sources, such as biographies, literary reviews, or magazine articles, include some analysis or interpretation of the information presented. As you conduct research, you will take detailed, careful notes about your discoveries. You will also evaluate the reliability of each source you find.

Step 4: Organizing Research and the Writer’s Ideas

When your research is complete, you will organize your findings and decide which sources to cite in your paper. You will also have an opportunity to evaluate the evidence you have collected and determine whether it supports your thesis, or the focus of your paper. You may decide to adjust your thesis or conduct additional research to ensure that your thesis is well supported.

Remember, your working thesis is not set in stone. You can and should change your working thesis throughout the research writing process if the evidence you find does not support your original thesis. Never try to force evidence to fit your argument. For example, your working thesis is “Mars cannot support life-forms.” Yet, a week into researching your topic, you find an article in the New York Times detailing new findings of bacteria under the Martian surface. Instead of trying to argue that bacteria are not life forms, you might instead alter your thesis to “Mars cannot support complex life-forms.”

Step 5: Drafting Your Paper

Now you are ready to combine your research findings with your critical analysis of the results in a rough draft. You will incorporate source materials into your paper and discuss each source thoughtfully in relation to your thesis or purpose statement.

When you cite your reference sources, it is important to pay close attention to standard conventions for citing sources in order to avoid plagiarism , or the practice of using someone else’s words without acknowledging the source. Later in this chapter, you will learn how to incorporate sources in your paper and avoid some of the most common pitfalls of attributing information.

Step 6: Revising and Editing Your Paper

In the final step of the research writing process, you will revise and polish your paper. You might reorganize your paper’s structure or revise for unity and cohesion, ensuring that each element in your paper flows into the next logically and naturally. You will also make sure that your paper uses an appropriate and consistent tone.

Once you feel confident in the strength of your writing, you will edit your paper for proper spelling, grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and formatting. When you complete this final step, you will have transformed a simple idea or question into a thoroughly researched and well-written paper you can be proud of!

Review the steps of the research writing process. Then answer the questions on your own sheet of paper.

In which steps of the research writing process are you allowed to change your thesis?
In step 2, which types of information should you include in your project schedule?
What might happen if you eliminated step 4 from the research writing process?

Key Takeaways

People undertake research projects throughout their academic and professional careers in order to answer specific questions, share their findings with others, increase their understanding of challenging topics, and strengthen their researching, writing, and analytical skills.
The research writing process generally comprises six steps: choosing a topic, scheduling and planning time for research and writing, conducting research, organizing research and ideas, drafting a paper, and revising and editing the paper.

More From Forbes

The role of research at universities: why it matters.

Share to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to Linkedin

(Photo by William B. Plowman/Getty Images)

Teaching and learning, research and discovery, synthesis and creativity, understanding and engagement, service and outreach. There are many “core elements” to the mission of a great university. Teaching would seem the most obvious, but for those outside of the university, “research” (taken to include scientific research, scholarship more broadly, as well as creative activity) may be the least well understood. This creates misunderstanding of how universities invest resources, especially those deriving from undergraduate tuition and state (or other public) support, and the misperception that those resources are being diverted away from what is believed should be the core (and sole) focus, teaching. This has led to a loss of trust, confidence, and willingness to continue to invest or otherwise support (especially our public) universities.

Why are universities engaged in the conduct of research? Who pays? Who benefits? And why does it all matter? Good questions. Let’s get to some straightforward answers. Because the academic research enterprise really is not that difficult to explain, and its impacts are profound.

So let’s demystify university-based research. And in doing so, hopefully we can begin building both better understanding and a better relationship between the public and higher education, both of which are essential to the future of US higher education.

Why are universities engaged in the conduct of research?

Universities engage in research as part of their missions around learning and discovery. This, in turn, contributes directly and indirectly to their primary mission of teaching. Universities and many colleges (the exception being those dedicated exclusively to undergraduate teaching) have as part of their mission the pursuit of scholarship. This can come in the form of fundamental or applied research (both are most common in the STEM fields, broadly defined), research-based scholarship or what often is called “scholarly activity” (most common in the social sciences and humanities), or creative activity (most common in the arts). Increasingly, these simple categorizations are being blurred, for all good reasons and to the good of the discovery of new knowledge and greater understanding of complex (transdisciplinary) challenges and the creation of increasingly interrelated fields needed to address them.

It goes without saying that the advancement of knowledge (discovery, innovation, creation) is essential to any civilization. Our nation’s research universities represent some of the most concentrated communities of scholars, facilities, and collective expertise engaged in these activities. But more importantly, this is where higher education is delivered, where students develop breadth and depth of knowledge in foundational and advanced subjects, where the skills for knowledge acquisition and understanding (including contextualization, interpretation, and inference) are honed, and where students are educated, trained, and otherwise prepared for successful careers. Part of that training and preparation derives from exposure to faculty who are engaged at the leading-edge of their fields, through their research and scholarly work. The best faculty, the teacher-scholars, seamlessly weave their teaching and research efforts together, to their mutual benefit, and in a way that excites and engages their students. In this way, the next generation of scholars (academic or otherwise) is trained, research and discovery continue to advance inter-generationally, and the cycle is perpetuated.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024.

University research can be expensive, particularly in laboratory-intensive fields. But the responsibility for much (indeed most) of the cost of conducting research falls to the faculty member. Faculty who are engaged in research write grants for funding (e.g., from federal and state agencies, foundations, and private companies) to support their work and the work of their students and staff. In some cases, the universities do need to invest heavily in equipment, facilities, and personnel to support select research activities. But they do so judiciously, with an eye toward both their mission, their strategic priorities, and their available resources.

Medical research, and medical education more broadly, is expensive and often requires substantial institutional investment beyond what can be covered by clinical operations or externally funded research. But universities with medical schools/medical centers have determined that the value to their educational and training missions as well as to their communities justifies the investment. And most would agree that university-based medical centers are of significant value to their communities, often providing best-in-class treatment and care in midsize and smaller communities at a level more often seen in larger metropolitan areas.

Research in the STEM fields (broadly defined) can also be expensive. Scientific (including medical) and engineering research often involves specialized facilities or pieces of equipment, advanced computing capabilities, materials requiring controlled handling and storage, and so forth. But much of this work is funded, in large part, by federal agencies such as the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Energy, US Department of Agriculture, and many others.

Research in the social sciences is often (not always) less expensive, requiring smaller amount of grant funding. As mentioned previously, however, it is now becoming common to have physical, natural, and social scientist teams pursuing large grant funding. This is an exciting and very promising trend for many reasons, not the least of which is the nature of the complex problems being studied.

Research in the arts and humanities typically requires the least amount of funding as it rarely requires the expensive items listed previously. Funding from such organizations as the National Endowment for the Arts, National Endowment for the Humanities, and private foundations may be able to support significant scholarship and creation of new knowledge or works through much more modest grants than would be required in the natural or physical sciences, for example.

Philanthropy may also be directed toward the support of research and scholarly activity at universities. Support from individual donors, family foundations, private or corporate foundations may be directed to support students, faculty, labs or other facilities, research programs, galleries, centers, and institutes.

Who benefits?

Students, both undergraduate and graduate, benefit from studying in an environment rich with research and discovery. Besides what the faculty can bring back to the classroom, there are opportunities to engage with faculty as part of their research teams and even conduct independent research under their supervision, often for credit. There are opportunities to learn about and learn on state-of-the-art equipment, in state-of-the-art laboratories, and from those working on the leading edge in a discipline. There are opportunities to co-author, present at conferences, make important connections, and explore post-graduate pathways.

The broader university benefits from active research programs. Research on timely and important topics attracts attention, which in turn leads to greater institutional visibility and reputation. As a university becomes known for its research in certain fields, they become magnets for students, faculty, grants, media coverage, and even philanthropy. Strength in research helps to define a university’s “brand” in the national and international marketplace, impacting everything from student recruitment, to faculty retention, to attracting new investments.

The community, region, and state benefits from the research activity of the university. This is especially true for public research universities. Research also contributes directly to economic development, clinical, commercial, and business opportunities. Resources brought into the university through grants and contracts support faculty, staff, and student salaries, often adding additional jobs, contributing directly to the tax base. Research universities, through their expertise, reputation, and facilities, can attract new businesses into their communities or states. They can also launch and incubate startup companies, or license and sell their technologies to other companies. Research universities often host meeting and conferences which creates revenue for local hotels, restaurants, event centers, and more. And as mentioned previously, university medical centers provide high-quality medical care, often in midsize communities that wouldn’t otherwise have such outstanding services and state-of-the-art facilities.

(Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

And finally, why does this all matter?

Research is essential to advancing society, strengthening the economy, driving innovation, and addressing the vexing and challenging problems we face as a people, place, and planet. It’s through research, scholarship, and discovery that we learn about our history and ourselves, understand the present context in which we live, and plan for and secure our future.

Research universities are vibrant, exciting, and inspiring places to learn and to work. They offer opportunities for students that few other institutions can match – whether small liberal arts colleges, mid-size teaching universities, or community colleges – and while not right for every learner or every educator, they are right for many, if not most. The advantages simply cannot be ignored. Neither can the importance or the need for these institutions. They need not be for everyone, and everyone need not find their way to study or work at our research universities, and we stipulate that there are many outstanding options to meet and support different learning styles and provide different environments for teaching and learning. But it’s critically important that we continue to support, protect, and respect research universities for all they do for their students, their communities and states, our standing in the global scientific community, our economy, and our nation.

Editorial Standards
Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts.

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's Terms of Service. We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
Content that otherwise violates our site's terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
Actions that otherwise violate our site's terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

Stay on topic and share your insights
Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
Protect your community.
Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's Terms of Service.

Maintaining health and well-being as we age

Although many older adults demonstrate high levels of resilience, they are also more prone to social isolation and loneliness than any other age group. Having strong social connections is especially important for mental health and well-being as we age, and is associated with lower instances of depression and anxiety.

Simon Fraser University (SFU) professor of mental health and aging Theodore D. Cosco researches a range of factors that promote healthy aging and resilience in older adults, from digital interventions to physical activity. He leads the Precision Mental Health Lab , a transdisciplinary research group dedicated to community-engaged and innovative technological approaches to improve well-being across all age groups.

One of his major research projects is studying data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA). Cosco is a co-investigator on the CLSA, a national, long-term study of more than 50,000 Canadians who were 45 to 85 years old when the program began in 2009. Over 160 researchers from 26 universities across Canada are involved in the CLSA.

Cosco and colleagues, including three PhD students he supervises: Lucy Kervin , Shawna Hopper , and Indira Riadi have found that during the coronavirus pandemic, the decreased ability to participate in social and physical activity was associated with increased risk of depression and anxiety in older adults.

These findings are outlined in Worsened ability to engage in social and physical activity during the COVID-19 pandemic and older adults’ mental health , published in Innovation in Aging .

We spoke to professor Cosco about his research.

What did your research reveal about older adults’ diminished ability to engage in physical and social activities during the coronavirus pandemic?

Our team used data from 24,108 participants surveyed during the first nine months of the COVID-19 pandemic and found roughly 22% screened positively for depression and 5% for anxiety.

Generally, older adults who reported worsened ability to participate in social and physical activities during the pandemic had poorer mental health outcomes than those whose ability remained the same or improved. We also found that participating in these activities had a buffering effect on depression and anxiety.

How does this research apply now that the pandemic is behind us? Do you have recommendations?

Our findings highlight the importance of fostering social and physical activity resources to mitigate the negative mental health impacts of future pandemics or other major life stressors that may affect the mental health of older adults. Beyond the pandemic these results highlight the importance of staying socially and physically active. You do not need to be socializing seven nights a week, nor do you need to be running marathons. Doing anything is better than nothing, so finding ways to integrate socializing and exercising into one’s life is an excellent strategy. Pick up the phone, walk to the shops, or find a way that you can integrate activity into one’s own life.

How do you approach the study of vast amounts of data from the CLSA? Do you have specific research questions to investigate, or does the study reveal topics that you want to pursue?

When working with large datasets, it is crucial to understand the types of data included, their collection dates and their sources. Once familiar with the available data, you can delve into current research and literature to formulate hypotheses. With extensive datasets, specificity in your initial hypotheses and deliberate in your analysis approaches are vital. Because of the dataset's size and the significant statistical power it provides, running numerous models to explore every possible outcome can often lead to “statistically significant” findings that occur by chance. This practice, known as “fishing” or “data dredging,” is discouraged because it may result in misleading associations. Therefore, it's important for us to be very purposeful in testing our hypotheses to avoid these issues.

In a previous Scholarly Impact of the Week, you discussed how during the pandemic older adults and their families quickly adopted the use of technology to increase connectedness. Is this trend still going strong, and do you have new insights on technology and older people?

During the pandemic, older adults and their families rapidly embraced technology to stay connected, a trend that remains strong today. This period really spotlighted both the advantages and limitations of our current technology. It became clear that tech companies need to move away from a one-size-fits-all approach. Products specifically designed with older adults in mind—taking into account their unique needs and preferences tend to be more successful. These intentionally crafted tools are not only more widely accepted but also have a more significant impact. The pandemic has shown us the importance of such tailored technology solutions in enhancing social connectedness for older populations.

For more: See professor Cosco’s previous Scholarly Impact of the Week article, Understanding the impacts of COVID-19 on older adults , and visit the Precision Mental Health Lab web page.

SFU's Scholarly Impact of the Week series does not reflect the opinions or viewpoints of the university, but those of the scholars. The timing of articles in the series is chosen weeks or months in advance, based on a published set of criteria. Any correspondence with university or world events at the time of publication is purely coincidental.

For more information, please see SFU's Code of Faculty Ethics and Responsibilities and the statement on academic freedom .

Search Menu
Sign in through your institution
Advance articles
Editor's Choice
Author Guidelines
Submission Site
Open Access
About The British Journal of Social Work
About the British Association of Social Workers
Editorial Board
Advertising and Corporate Services
Journals Career Network
Self-Archiving Policy
Dispatch Dates
Journals on Oxford Academic
Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, conclusions, research gaps, acknowledgements.

< Previous

Children’s Participation in Child Welfare: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

Article contents
Figures & tables
Supplementary Data

Paul McCafferty, Esther Mercado Garcia, Children’s Participation in Child Welfare: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews, The British Journal of Social Work , Volume 54, Issue 3, April 2024, Pages 1092–1108, https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcad167

Permissions Icon Permissions

The objective of this research was to conduct a systematic review of systematic reviews related to Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) as it relates to children and young people involved with child welfare agencies. This systematic review sought to comply with the guidance from the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis on umbrella reviews. Fourteen databases were searched using predefined terms. Six hundred seventy-four original hits were retrieved for title and abstract searching after independent searching by the authors. Of those, fourteen were included for full independent reads and all fourteen were selected after discussion. Each systematic review was appraised using an eleven-point quality checklist from JBI. A thematic review was conducted to ascertain the themes across all systematic reviews. Three themes emerged (i) children’s voice is not taken seriously; (ii) relationships are an important determining factor in (un)successful participation; and (iii) the context of participation is important. Our conclusion is that despite mandated UNCRC requirements to involve children and young people within the child protection system, the possibilities for children and young people to express their views remain restricted.

Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) stipulates that children have the right to express their views and to participate in decisions that directly affect them. Uncomplicated enough one would have supposed, intuitive in fact, for who could possibly argue against children and young people (C&YP) having a voice in decisions that affect them—the most basic of human rights. After all, adults enjoy this right. And for the authors of the Convention, this inalienable right must have seemed obvious too, fundamental almost in its inherent assumption that it is just the right thing to do.

But the reality of successfully applying Article 12 has bedevilled legislators, policymakers and practitioners alike since the inception on the Convention on the Rights of the Child (the Convention) as they struggle to decipher and apply their Article 12 obligations to practice ( McCafferty, 2021 ). Consequently, the practice reality regarding enacting Article 12 obligations has created something of a legislative, policy and practice duality; one in which States and state actors are mandated to listen, involve and respond to C&YP’s voice but find doing so exceptionally taxing. What we call the practice reality/legislative mandate duality has arguably led to unintended obfuscation in the participatory landscape with a parallel diminution of the voice of C&YP. This duality is nowhere more apparent than in child welfare, the result of which has generated a disappointing stasis where the voice of arguably society’s most vulnerable C&YP is lost ( McCafferty, 2021 ).

Whilst research in the social work field may have been to some extent sluggish to explore children’s participation, it has increased more recently in both quality and quantity with a growing number of scholars paying greater attention to this field of study. Both empirical and theoretical studies are beginning to enrich our understanding of the opportunities and challenges Article 12 presents for C&YPs participation in child welfare. This increased interest is fuelled by a feeling that we in social work are somehow just not getting it right and we stand accused of persistent failures to involve children fully in decisions affecting them (e.g. Department for Education (DfE), 2020 ).

General themes emerging from research broadly suggest two things. First, that challenges exist at practitioner, managerial, organisational, systems and societal level that frustrate the full actualisation of C&YP’s right to be heard. For example, Toros (2021a,b ) in two systematic reviews suggests that children are not able to participate in decision-making processes often enough and their voices are either not being heard or not taken seriously. Faced with the unenviable task of protecting children in an ever increasingly complex world, child welfare professionals are entrusted both ethically and legally with acting in children’s best interests and deciding where and how those best interests are met. However, these best interest decisions are recognised as being amongst the most testing decisions a child welfare worker is likely to make due to their challenging and contested nature (McCafferty, 2020). In this environment, research by McCafferty et al. (2021) suggests that child welfare practitioners are making increasingly more protectionist and interventionist decisions and that this process instinctively reduces C&YP’s agentic status as individuals capable of forming a view and for that view to be heard. ‘As a result of this deficit archetype based on difference, children tend to be granted protection in social work which excludes them from decisions, deprives them of their autonomy, assumes incompetence and emphasises dependence on adults’ ( McCafferty, 2017 , p. 333).

Secondly, when done well, involving C&YP in decisions that affect their life trajectory has beneficial outcomes for them and evidence of this exists across a range of disciplines such as in health, education and policy making ( van Bijleveld et al. , 2015 ; Kennan et al. , 2018 ). Furthermore, participation in decision-making results in beneficial developmental effects ( Falch‐Eriksen et al ., 2021 ) as well as potentially improving decision-making processes and outcomes by ensuring that decisions are more inclusive, responsive and tailored to specific needs. C&YP’s participation increases the likelihood of assessments being more accurate and outcomes more in line with what C&YP need, contributing to more accurate assessment outcomes, as it increases the accuracy of the understanding of the child’s emotional state, thoughts, feelings and hopes for the future.

So, we know that since 1989 when the UNCRC was first enacted, social work has studied C&YPs participation in child welfare, and several systematic reviews have already been conducted. Collectively they provide a large body of relevant evidence, one so large, however, that it is not easy to summarise the patterns in their findings. This makes it challenging for decision makers, researchers, academics and practitioners to utilise the best available evidence to inform their decisions. The time is right therefore to draw thirty-three years’ worth of data into one study so that we can take stock of where we are at in terms of our knowledge, drawing all the disparate systematic reviews into one place.

The purpose of this systematic review is to condense data from all the existing systematic reviews into one overarching review and deliver a meticulous summary of all the available research from systematic reviews of C&YPs participation in child welfare. Called an umbrella review by Aromataris and Munn (2020) , this umbrella review will appraise and collate all relevant empirical evidence gathered from existing systematic reviews into one place to provide a complete interpretation of research results. Doing so will identify questions for which the available evidence provides clear answers and thus for which further research is not necessary. The review will also identify research gaps in our current understanding of the field and help set the short- to medium-term research priorities for scholars going forward.

Search strategy

The characteristics of a systematic review are well-defined and internationally accepted and they generally agree that the defining characteristics of a systematic review are that it must have (i) clearly articulated objectives and questions to be addressed; (ii) an inclusion and exclusion criteria stipulated a priori that determine the eligibility of studies; (iii) a comprehensive search to identify all relevant studies, both published and unpublished; (iv) an appraisal of the quality of included studies, assessment of the validity of their results, and reporting of any exclusions based on quality; (v) analysis of data extracted from the included research; (vi) a presentation and synthesis of the findings extracted and (vii) a transparent reporting of the methodology and methods used to conduct the review ( Higgins et al., 2022 ). This review sought to comply with the guidance from JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis (Aromataris and Munn, 2020), specifically Chapter 10, Umbrella Reviews, and Evidence-Based Practice ( Aromataris et al. , 2020 ).

In the process of creating a search formula, the topic addressed by this review was converted into four key concept groups as agreed by both authors: <participation> AND <social work> AND <child welfare> AND <children and young people>. For each concept, search terms reflecting its main characteristics were identified and combined into a search formula by both authors in consultation with the subject specialist librarian from Queen’s University Belfast over three meetings. This generic formula was reviewed and later adjusted by both authors along with the subject librarian to fit the databases’ particular facilities. The selection of electronic bibliographic databases was informed by both pragmatic and methodological considerations relating to databases’ quality appraisal, relevance and accessibility. The searches took place over a two-week period between 15 and 29 August 2022.

Overall, fourteen electronic bibliographic databases were selected:

Child Development.

Directory of Open Access Journals (DOJA).

International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS).

Social Care Online.

Social Policy and Practice.

Social Science Citation Index.

Social Services Abstracts.

Sociological Abstracts.

Campbell Collaboration.

CINAHL Plus.

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL).

Google Scholar.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Beginning with quality criteria, this umbrella review was restricted to articles published in peer-reviewed journals. Doing so ensures that there was an independent standard of quality applied that goes beyond the knowledge base of the authors and incorporates the expertise of journal reviewers ( Alfandari and Taylor, 2022 ). Regarding relevance criteria, to be included in our umbrella review, studies needed to be (i) a systematic review of relevant papers pertaining to the topic, (ii) the topic needed to relate to C&YP’s participation in child welfare social work, (iii) to qualify as a systematic review, reviews needed to (a) employ a systematic, recognised, explicit and replicable processes for searching the literature to retrieve research related to the topic, and (b) report on empirical research that is based on either quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods research designs—action research or single case study methods that impose greater challenges for determining quality ( Taylor et al. , 2015 ) theoretical material, editorials, government papers and policy documents were all excluded from this review. In addition, the time frame of the search was from 1989 when the UNCRC was enacted to ensure we gained a full representation of every review published since that time. Finally, for practical reasons, the search was restricted to publications in the English language.

Search outcome and screening

There were two rounds of searches, both done independently by each author. Bibliographic data about the studies derived was imported into an Excel spreadsheet with separate pages for each database and when combined there was a total of 889 searches retrieved. Through discussion, 215 duplicates were agreed upon and removed leaving 674 original hits. When agreement was reached about the removal, initial titles and abstract screening against the inclusion criteria took place, again independently. Based on a structured colour coding scheme developed by the authors, each study was tagged with one of four possible colours: (i) blue for inclusion; (ii) red for exclusion; (iii) green in cases of uncertainties that required more discussion; and (iv) grey, in cases of uncertainties that required additional information when bibliographic data were incomplete. Studies coloured red were also recorded by the reasons for their exclusion, which were chosen from our inclusion criteria. The authors then came together and agreed on ninety-eight studies for full-text assessment for inclusion with eligibility carried out independently by the authors. When disagreements arose, they were thoroughly discussed between the authors until a consensus was reached. Of these ninety-eight studies, eighty-four were removed leaving fourteen studies included for the umbrella review.

Once this first round was complete, each author completed an independent review of each study’s reference list by hand. One further study was identified through this search for a full read but was discounted by agreement having not met the inclusion criteria.

The review’s selection process is outlined in Figure 1 using the PRISMA diagram ( Page et al. , 2021 ).

Flowchart of the search and screening process.

Data analysis

Data analysis summarised the included reviews focusing on number of reviews published, type of review (e.g. systematic review, systematic scoping, literature review), aim, period, number of articles, place of publication, analysis and findings. When articles specified the PRISMA flow diagram was used, it was specified. For data analysis, the authors reviewed all the articles and developed three themes—(i) children’s voice is not taken seriously, (ii) relationships are an important determining factor in (un)successful participation and (iii) the context of participation is important.

Included studies

Data analysis is based on fourteen studies published from 1989 to 2022. The characteristics of included studies provided an overview of the existing literature on the subject (see Table 1 ).

Summary of studies analysed.

Quality appraisal

Studies identified as meeting the inclusion criteria were appraised for quality against the JBI Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Synthesis by Aromataris et al. (2015) using an eleven-point quality assessment tool to determine the quality of each of the systematic reviews selected for inclusion. The authors independently scored each of the items before jointly discussing them and coming to a consensus about quality. Discussions focused on what was considered acceptable to the aims of the review in terms of the specific study characteristics and what represented an adequate search strategy or appropriate methods of synthesis. Discussions took place prior to this appraisal so we agreed on what constituted acceptable levels of information to allocate a positive appraisal compared with a negative, or response of ‘unclear’. All fourteen studies were included.

Umbrella review

Data analysis revealed three main themes.

Theme 1: Children’s voice is not taken seriously

Studies show children’s participation in the child protection system is significantly diminished in practice ( Skauge et al ., 2021 ; Toros, 2021a ). Children have the right to be heard and to make decisions about their own lives, but their voices have been weakened and they find that being authentically heard and to exercise their right to participation is challenging ( Brummelaar et al ., 2018 ; Collins et al. , 2021 ; McPherson et al ., 2021 ). This is particularly evident in residential settings ( McPherson et al. , 2021 ; van Bijleveld et al ., 2015 ), child maltreatment ( Bartelink et al. , 2015 ) and within mental health services ( Davies and Wright, 2008 ).

This research indicates that despite the recognised importance of children’s rights and participation ( Falch-Eriksen et al. , 2021 ), children are often unable to participate in decision-making processes and that their voices are not taken seriously or heard ( Toros, 2021b ). Kennan et al. (2018) , however, showed how the use of advocates could encourage participation in such contexts, especially with younger children who feel more dissatisfied ( Brummelaar et al ., 2018 ).

Theme 2: Relationships are an important determining factor in (un)successful participation

The relationship between social workers and children is essential to the promotion of participation. McPherson et al. (2021) address the central role of the relationship and relational practice in the process of facilitating participation. Findings across studies suggest several factors influence this relationship and the process and success of participation. First, the age of the child ( Brummelaar et al. , 2018 ; Toros, 2021a ); secondly, protectionist approaches adopted by professionals and welfare agencies ( Toros, 2021a ; van Bijleveld et al. , 2015 ); thirdly, the quality of the professional relationship ( van Bijleveld et al. , 2015 ; Brummelaar et al. , 2018 ; Kennan et al. , 2018 ; Strømland et al. , 2022 ); fourthly, professionals’ attitude towards participation—positive or negative ( Brummelaar et al., 2018 ); fifthly, stigmatising and impairment-focused practices ( Toros et al., 2018 ) and, finally, professional qualities ( Davies and Wright, 2008 ; van Bijleveld et al ., 2015 ). From the perspective of C&YP themselves within the child protection system itself, the study by Wilson et al. (2020) emphasises that C&YP’s early experiences of child welfare relationships are felt as frightening due to the pressure of the investigation process, the invasiveness of professionals and that this decreases participatory activity.

In this sense, professionals may have conflicting attitudes towards children’s views and perceptions ( Brummelaar et al ., 2018 ), differences in the interpretation of participation and the weight given to C&YP opinions in the decision-making process exist ( van Bijleveld et al ., 2015 ; Skauge et al ., 2021 ), ambivalence towards professional participatory intervention also exists ( Davies and Wright, 2008 ), whilst children’s perspectives differ from that of professionals ( Toros et al., 2018 ).

Theme 3: The context of participation is important

The concept of participation is confusing ( Collins et al ., 2021 ). The lack of full recognition and operationalisation of children’s right to be sufficiently heard is one of the main challenges in the context of participation ( Strømland et al ., 2022 ). This may be because child protection systems are very heterogeneous in terms of legislation, approaches and working methods ( Skauge et al. , 2021 ). Ideas about participation are underpinned by policies in which different cultural and organisational contexts underlie and limit participation itself ( Brummelaar et al ., 2018 ; Jensen et al ., 2020 ; Skauge et al ., 2021 ). Despite attempts to follow processes such as the use of advocates, a child’s attendance at an assessment, planning or review meeting, Family Welfare Conferences and recording a child’s views in writing, spaces are neither inclusive nor conducive to fostering such participation ( Kennan et al ., 2018 ). In the study of Toros et al. (2018) , studies suggest that protection concerns and bureaucratised and authority-based systems limit such a participatory context.

These organisational challenges are related to government perceptions and media representations of public awareness ( Davies and Wright, 2008 ; van Bijleveld et al ., 2015 ) and risk assessment of children ( Davies and Wright, 2008 ; Bartelink et al ., 2015 ). The lack of quality time to work directly with C&YP has also been cited as one of the main problems social workers encounter when trying to involve C&YP ( van Bijleveld et al., 2015 ).

Participation has become firmly rooted in child rights discourse, public policy and research around the world ( Skauge et al ., 2021 ). Within the child protection system, it has been considered an important issue, but despite the CRC guidelines, possibilities to express their views and needs are restricted ( Toros, 2021a ).

Cultural conceptions, the adult-centric worldview of social work professionals, age discrimination, denial of opportunities and unhelpful participatory efforts remain a major challenge ( Collins, 2017 ; Strømland et al ., 2022 ). How this power is exercised is influenced by ideology, attitudes and beliefs ( Wilson et al ., 2020 ; McPherson et al ., 2021 ). As such, conceptualisations of protection continue to reflect traditional approaches to participation in child welfare that indicate a reductionist paternalistic attitude that privileges protection over empowerment ( Collins, 2017 ; Collins et al ., 2021 ). The findings found in this article evidence that the fragmented view of children through polarised thinking via dichotomous positions rather than a holistic view may be due to the complexity of child protection work ( Jensen, 2020 ). The poor relationship between professionals and children may be influenced by bureaucratisation, lack of resources and lack of knowledge ( van Bijleveld et al ., 2015 ; Falch-Eriksen et al ., 2021 ; Skauge et al ., 2021 ).

Based on the three main themes of this article, several implications can be drawn. First, care and professional systems can break down the division between everyday life decisions and important decisions in children’s lives ( McPherson et al ., 2021 ). Structured and shared methods of assessment and decision making are therefore needed ( Bartelink et al ., 2015 ). Secondly, the role of social workers and their relationship with the child is crucial in fostering the right to participation ( Brummelaar et al., 2018 ). To improve the quality of relationships between workers and children, therefore, a paradigm shift and methods are needed to help professionals increase their competence and confidence to engage children effectively ( Toros et al ., 2018 ). Thirdly, ensuring the best interests of children means that their voices are not silenced and that access to information and helping them to express their views must be one of the tasks of both professionals and child protection systems ( Davies and Wright, 2008 ; Strømland et al ., 2022 ). Therefore, the process of participation involves understanding the importance of the child’s experience in the context of everyday life ( Skauge et al ., 2021 ).

Limitations

In terms of the methodology of the review search, we used the largest number of electronic bibliographic databases that it was feasible to use in the circumstances (i.e. all the databases available in the first author’s library at Queen’s University Belfast), but a funded review might retrieve additional papers. Quality appraisal was affected by restricting inclusion to publications in peer-reviewed journals, but we cannot exclude the possibility of the review having some publication bias. Grey literature was not searched for example, which may have uncovered theses in this area and there is a plethora of evaluations of participatory practice in child welfare agencies that are neither published nor easily accessed. Already recognised by van Bijleveld et al. (2015) , there are still problems with the search terms that challenged us given the variety of terms used across agencies, cultures and countries to describe participation, so greater homogeneity in language would be helpful going forward to reduce the chance of missing valuable research. To reduce this risk, we consulted with the specialist librarian at Queen’s University Belfast and conducted our own initial scoping exercise to identify core terms, which we subsequently used in this research.

To avoid homogenising C&YP as one group, it is important to disaggregate them across age, culture, class, gender, ethnic background, etc., to understand them, not as one amorphous mass but as individuals with different identities, needs and ways of being seen and heard. It is also important to move away from small-scale micro studies that ignore the macro-political, sociocultural, economic, philosophical and geographic influences that are brought to bear on the micro participatory landscape, for these influences (not always benign) undoubtedly impact the opportunities for authentic participation. Finally, we see the importance of large-scale efficacy studies to determine the effectiveness of participatory interventions to develop a more informed evidence base of what works, in what circumstances, why and for who. This of course will necessitate more funding being made available and in a competitive funding landscape this will require funders to realise the importance of this area of study—we remain hopeful.

We would like to thank Norma Menabney for the specialist librarian support provided.

This study has been funded by José Castillejo Programme for mobility abroad youth doctor and carried out by Prof. Dr Mercado at Queen’s University of Belfast (reference number CAS21/0254).

Alfandari R. , Taylor B. J. ( 2022 ) ‘ Systematic bibliographic database searching for literature reviews: Case study on child protection decision making ’, British Journal of Social Work , 52 ( 1 ), pp. 518 – 35 .

Google Scholar

Aromataris E. , Munn Z. ( 2020 ) JBI manual for evidence synthesis , available online at: https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01 (accessed August 10, 2022).

Aromataris E. , Fernandez R. , Godfrey C. M. , Holly C. , Khalil H. , Tungpunkom P. ( 2015 ) ‘ Summarizing systematic reviews: Methodological development, conduct and reporting of an Umbrella review approach ’, International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare , 13 ( 3 ), pp. 132 – 40 .

Aromataris E. , Fernandez R. , Godfrey C. , Holly C. , Khalil H. , Tungpunkom P. ( 2020 ) ‘Chapter 10: Umbrella reviews’, in Aromataris E. , Munn Z. (eds), JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI, 2020 . Available from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global .

Google Preview

Bartelink C. , van Yperen T. A. , ten Berge I. J. ( 2015 ) ‘ Deciding on child maltreatment: A literature review on methods that improve decision-making ’, Child Abuse & Neglect , 49 , 142 – 53 .

Brummelaar M. D. C. , Harder A. T. , Kalverboer M. E. , Post W. J. , Knorth E. J. ( 2018 ) ‘ Participation of youth in decision-making procedures during residential care: A narrative review ’, Child & Family Social Work , 23 ( 1 ), pp. 33 – 44 .

Collins T. M. , Rizzini I. , Mayhew A. ( 2021 ) ‘ Fostering global dialogue: Conceptualisations of children’s rights to participation and protection ’, Children & Society , 35 ( 2 ), pp. 295 – 310 .

Collins T. M. ( 2017 ) ‘ A child’s right to participate: Implications for international child protection ’, International Journal of Human Rights , 21 ( 1 ), pp. 14 – 46 .

Davies J. , Wright J. ( 2008 ) ‘ Children’s voices: A review of the literature pertinent to looked-after children’s views of mental health services ’, Child and Adolescent Mental Health , 13 ( 1 ), pp. 26 – 31 .

Department for Education (DfE ) ( 2020 ) Complexity and Challenge: A Triennial Analysis of SCRs 2014–2017 (PDF) , London , Department for Education (DfE ).

Falch‐Eriksen A. , Toros K. , Sindi I. , Lehtme R. ( 2021 ) ‘ Children expressing their views in child protection casework: Current research and their rights going forward ’, Child & Family Social Work , 26 ( 3 ), pp. 485 – 97 .

Higgins J. , Lasserson T. , Chandler J. , Tovey D. , Thomas J. , Flemyng E. , Churchill R. Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews , Cochrane , London , 2022

Jensen I. B. , Studsrød I. , Ellingsen I. T. ( 2020 ) ‘ Child protection social workers’ constructions of children and childhood: An integrative review ’, Child & Family Social Work , 25 ( S1 ), pp. 83 – 96 .

Kennan D. , Brady B. , Forkan C. ( 2018 ) ‘ Supporting children’s participation in decision making: A systematic literature review exploring the effectiveness of participatory processes ’, British Journal of Social Work , 48 ( 7 ), pp. 1985 – 2002 .

McCafferty P. ( 2017 ) ‘ Implementing Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in child protection decision making. A critical analysis of the challenges and opportunities for social work ’, Child Care in Practice , 23 ( 4 ), pp. 327 – 41 .

McCafferty P. ( 2020 ) ‘“ Do I read it? No”. Knowledge utilisation in child welfare decisions ’, Child Care in Practice , 28 ( 3 ), pp. 438 – 63 .

McCafferty P. ( 2021 ) ‘ Children’s participation in child welfare decision making: Recognising dichotomies, conceptualising critically informed solutions ’, Child Care in Practice .

McCafferty P. , Duffy J. , Hayes D. ( 2021 ) ‘ Permanency decisions in child welfare: A qualitative study ’, British Journal of Social Work , 51 ( 6 ), pp. 2134 –21 54 .

McPherson L. , Vosz M. , Gatwiri K. , Parmenter N. , Macnamara N. , Mitchell J. , Tucci J. ( 2021 ) ‘ What does research tell us about young people’s participation in decision making in residential care? A systematic scoping review ’, Children and Youth Services Review , 122 , 105899 .

Page M. J. , McKenzie J. E. , Bossuyt P. M. , Boutron I. , Hoffmann T. C. , Mulrow C. D. , Shamseer L. , Tetzlaff J. M. , Akl E. A. , Brennan S. E. , Chou R. , Glanville J. , Grimshaw J. M. , Hróbjartsson A. , Lalu M. M. , Li T. , Loder E. W. , Mayo-Wilson E. , McDonald S. , McGuinness L. A. , Stewart L. A. , Thomas J. , Tricco A. C. , Welch V. A. , Whiting P. , Moher D. ( 2021 ) ‘ The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews ’, British Medical Journal , 10 ( 1 ), p. n71 .

Skauge B. , Storhaug A. S. , Marthinsen E. ( 2021 ) ‘ The what, why and how of child participation—A review of the conceptualization of “child participation” in child welfare ’, Social Sciences , 10 ( 2 ), p. 54 .

Strømland M. , Bahus M. K. , Andersen A. J. W. ( 2022 ) ‘ Too vulnerable to participate? A systematic literature review of the gap between a right to participate and participation, in welfare services ’, Journal of Human Rights Practice , 14 ( 1 ), pp. 1, 331 – 51 .

Taylor B.J. , Killick K. , McGlade A. ( 2015 ) Understanding & Using Research in Social Work (Mastering Social Work Practice) . Sage: London.

Toros K. ( 2021a ) ‘ Children’s participation in decision making from child welfare workers’ perspectives: A systematic review ’, Research on Social Work Practice , 31 ( 4 ), pp. 367 – 74 .

Toros K. ( 2021b ) ‘ A systematic review of children’s participation in child protection decision‐making: Tokenistic presence or not? ’, Children & Society , 35 ( 3 ), pp. 395 – 411 .

Toros K. , Tiko A. , DiNitto D. M. ( 2018 ) ‘ Family engagement in the child welfare system: A scoping review ’, Children and Youth Services Review , 88 , pp. 598 – 607 .

van Bijleveld G. G. , Dedding C. W. M. , Bunders-Aelen J. F. G. ( 2015 ) ‘ Children’s and young people’s participation within child welfare and child protection services: A state-of-the-art review ’, Child & Family Social Work , 20 ( 2 ), pp. 129 – 38 .

Wilson S. , Hean S. , Abebe T. , Heaslip V. ( 2020 ) ‘ Children’s experiences with child protection services: A synthesis of qualitative evidence ’, Children and Youth Services Review , 113 , p. 104974 .

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

Online ISSN 1468-263X
Print ISSN 0045-3102
About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Institutional account management
Rights and permissions
Get help with access
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Study at Cambridge

About the university, research at cambridge.

For Cambridge students
For our researchers
Business and enterprise
Colleges and Departments
Email and phone search
Give to Cambridge
Museums and collections
Events and open days
Fees and finance
Postgraduate courses
How to apply
Fees and funding
Postgraduate events
International students
Continuing education
Executive and professional education
Courses in education
How the University and Colleges work
Visiting the University
Annual reports
Equality and diversity
A global university
Public engagement

Birth by C-section more than doubles odds of measles vaccine failure

Research home
About research overview
Animal research overview
Overseeing animal research overview
The Animal Welfare and Ethical Review Body
Animal welfare and ethics
Report on the allegations and matters raised in the BUAV report
What types of animal do we use? overview
Guinea pigs
Equine species
Naked mole-rats
Non-human primates (marmosets)
Other birds
Non-technical summaries
Animal Welfare Policy
Alternatives to animal use
Further information
Funding Agency Committee Members
Research integrity
Horizons magazine
Strategic Initiatives & Networks
Nobel Prize
Interdisciplinary Research Centres
Open access
Energy sector partnerships
Podcasts overview
S2 ep1: What is the future?
S2 ep2: What did the future look like in the past?
S2 ep3: What is the future of wellbeing?
S2 ep4 What would a more just future look like?
Research impact

Very sick 5 year old little boy fighting measles infection, boy is laying in bed under the blanket with an agonizing expression, boy is covered with rash caused by virus.

Researchers say it is vital that children born by caesarean section receive two doses of the measles vaccine for robust protection against the disease.

A study by the University of Cambridge, UK, and Fudan University, China, has found that a single dose of the measles jab is up to 2.6 times more likely to be completely ineffective in children born by C-section, compared to those born naturally.

Failure of the vaccine means that the child’s immune system does not produce antibodies to fight against measles infection, so they remain susceptible to the disease.

A second measles jab was found to induce a robust immunity against measles in C-section children.

Measles is a highly infectious disease, and even low vaccine failure rates can significantly increase the risk of an outbreak.

A potential reason for this effect is linked to the development of the infant’s gut microbiome – the vast collection of microbes that naturally live inside the gut. Other studies have shown that vaginal birth transfers a greater variety of microbes from mother to baby, which can boost the immune system.

“We’ve discovered that the way we’re born - either by C-section or natural birth - has long-term consequences on our immunity to diseases as we grow up,” said Professor Henrik Salje in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Genetics, joint senior author of the report.

He added: “We know that a lot of children don't end up having their second measles jab, which is dangerous for them as individuals and for the wider population.

“Infants born by C-section are the ones we really want to be following up to make sure they get their second measles jab, because their first jab is much more likely to fail.”

The results are published today in the journal Nature Microbiology .

At least 95% of the population needs to be fully vaccinated to keep measles under control but the UK is well below this, despite the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine being available through the NHS Routine Childhood Immunisation Programme.

An increasing number of women around the world are choosing to give birth by caesarean section: in the UK a third of all births are by C-section, in Brazil and Turkey over half of all children are born this way.

“With a C-section birth, children aren’t exposed to the mother’s microbiome in the same way as with a vaginal birth. We think this means they take longer to catch up in developing their gut microbiome, and with it, the ability of the immune system to be primed by vaccines against diseases including measles,” said Salje.

To get their results, the researchers used data from previous studies of over 1,500 children in Hunan, China, which included blood samples taken every few weeks from birth to the age of 12. This allowed them to see how levels of measles antibodies in the blood change over the first few years of life, including following vaccination.

They found that 12% of children born via caesarean section had no immune response to their first measles vaccination, as compared to 5% of children born by vaginal delivery. This means that many of the children born by C-section did still mount an immune response following their first vaccination.

Two doses of the measles jab are needed for the body to mount a long-lasting immune response and protect against measles. According to the World Health Organisation, in 2022 only 83% of the world's children had received one dose of measles vaccine by their first birthday – the lowest since 2008.

Salje said: “Vaccine hesitancy is really problematic, and measles is top of the list of diseases we’re worried about because it’s so infectious.”

Measles is one of the world’s most contagious diseases, spread by coughs and sneezes. It starts with cold-like symptoms and a rash, and can lead to serious complications including blindness, seizures, and death.

Before the measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, there were major measles epidemics every few years causing an estimated 2.6 million deaths each year.

The research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

Wang, W et al: ‘Dynamics of measles immunity from birth and following vaccination.’ Nature Microbiology, 13 May 2024. DOI: 10.1038/s41564-024-01694-x

Read this next

TB vaccine may enable elimination of the disease in cattle by reducing its spread

New Cambridge-developed resources help students learn how maths can help tackle infectious diseases

Young girl watching herself being injected with COVID-19 vaccine at a medical clinic

Significant gaps in COVID-19 vaccine uptake may have led to over 7,000 hospitalisations and deaths

COVID-19 showed the importance of genomic surveillance – we need it to help fight antimicrobial resistance

Media enquiries.

Very sick 5 year old little boy fighting measles infection, boy is laying in bed under the blanket with an agonizing expression, boy is covered with rash caused by virus.

Credit: CHBD / E+ / Getty Images

Search research

Our selection of the week's biggest Cambridge research news sent directly to your inbox. Enter your email address, confirm you're happy to receive our emails and then select 'Subscribe'.

I wish to receive a weekly Cambridge research news summary by email.

The University of Cambridge will use your email address to send you our weekly research news email. We are committed to protecting your personal information and being transparent about what information we hold. Please read our email privacy notice for details.

vaccination
Infectious diseases
Henrik Salje
School of the Biological Sciences
Department of Genetics
Wolfson College

Related organisations

Fudan University

Connect with us

Contact the University
Accessibility statement
Freedom of information
Privacy policy and cookies
Statement on Modern Slavery
Terms and conditions
University A-Z
Undergraduate
Postgraduate
Cambridge University Press & Assessment
Research news
About research at Cambridge
Spotlight on...

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Health Topics A-Z

About Public Health Workforce Development

At a glance.

Investments in the public health workforce build capacity for state, tribal, local, and territorial public health agencies to provide essential public health services. This capacity is critical for communities to be able to respond to emergencies and thrive.

Public Health AmeriCorps members discuss a community project.

Important things to know

Decades of underinvestment have undermined the public health workforce—America's first line of defense against disease outbreaks and other health threats.

With diminished funding and hiring barriers, health departments at state, local, tribal and territorial levels are unable to recruit and retain skilled professionals .

175 million Americans‎

Shrinking staff and reduced capacity have led to

Workers unprepared to keep up with changes in technology
A lack of systems and data to assess and monitor workforce needs
Added work-related stress and burnout among the existing workforce

Building Work Capacity

For our public health workforce to be effective and responsive, it must reflect the communities we serve. CDC's CORE Health Equity Science and Intervention Strategy challenges us to make health equity a foundational goal.

The Division of Workforce Development (DWD) provides leadership to chart a path forward for multi-level public health workforce development. DWD engages CDC programs and public health partners to share quality science, make data-driven decisions, and support strategic workforce development.

Recruit: Attract a Diverse Public Health Workforce

Fellowships and training opportunities.

CDC offers many internships, full-time fellowships, and other opportunities on public health topics from epidemiology to health economics. These opportunities offer pathways to public health careers. Strengthening the diversity of those who participate in these programs today leads to more inclusive public health workforce tomorrow.

Public Health AmeriCorps

Public Health AmeriCorps is a groundbreaking program to recruit, train, and develop the next generation of public health leaders. It builds local capacity to advance equitable health outcomes.

Public Health Leadership and Education, Advancing Health Equity and Data Sciences (PHLEADS)

PHLEADS , a cooperative agreement program, supports identifying and implementing best practices in leadership, data science education, training, recruitment, and retention. PH LEADS national partner associations include

Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health
National Network of Public Health Institutes
National Hispanic Health Foundation

Train: Upskill the Current and Future Workforce

Curated training and learning platforms give the whole public health community access to quality courses and continuing education.

CDC TRAIN is an online learning management system operated in partnership with the Public Health Foundation.

CDC Learning Connection

CDC Learning Connection highlights quality trainings for healthcare and public health professionals. All activities are based on adult learning principles and reflect CDC quality training standards .

Build Evidence: To Inform Tomorrow's Workforce

Public health workforce research center (phwrc).

PHWRC supports and shares rigorous, applied research that helps decision-makers at all levels of public health understand workforce needs.

Leadership Initiatives

Public health workforce interests and needs survey (ph wins).

PH WINS is the only nationally representative source of data on the people that make up the governmental public health workforce.

LIGHTS, CAMERA, ACTION: The Future of Public Health National Summit Series

A four-part series convened by the CDC Foundation to advance recommendations for a modernized U.S. public health system.

National Consortium for Public Health Workforce Development

The National Consortium for Public Health Workforce Development was convened by the de Beaumont Foundation. This group relaunched in 2020 to develop an action plan for strengthening and supporting the workforce.

See deBeaumont Foundation and the Public Health National Center for Innovations and Association of State and Territorial Health Officials .
See National Association of County and City Health Officials .

PH Workforce

This site comprises a collection of resources from CDC and CDC partners to support efforts to develop, train, and sustain a strong public health workforce.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim
v.44(4); 2016 Aug

What is Scientific Research and How Can it be Done?

Scientific researches are studies that should be systematically planned before performing them. In this review, classification and description of scientific studies, planning stage randomisation and bias are explained.

Research conducted for the purpose of contributing towards science by the systematic collection, interpretation and evaluation of data and that, too, in a planned manner is called scientific research: a researcher is the one who conducts this research. The results obtained from a small group through scientific studies are socialised, and new information is revealed with respect to diagnosis, treatment and reliability of applications. The purpose of this review is to provide information about the definition, classification and methodology of scientific research.

Before beginning the scientific research, the researcher should determine the subject, do planning and specify the methodology. In the Declaration of Helsinki, it is stated that ‘the primary purpose of medical researches on volunteers is to understand the reasons, development and effects of diseases and develop protective, diagnostic and therapeutic interventions (method, operation and therapies). Even the best proven interventions should be evaluated continuously by investigations with regard to reliability, effectiveness, efficiency, accessibility and quality’ ( 1 ).

The questions, methods of response to questions and difficulties in scientific research may vary, but the design and structure are generally the same ( 2 ).

Classification of Scientific Research

Scientific research can be classified in several ways. Classification can be made according to the data collection techniques based on causality, relationship with time and the medium through which they are applied.

Observational
Experimental
Descriptive
Retrospective
Prospective
Cross-sectional
Social descriptive research ( 3 )

Another method is to classify the research according to its descriptive or analytical features. This review is written according to this classification method.

I. Descriptive research

Case series
Surveillance studies

II. Analytical research

Observational studies: cohort, case control and cross- sectional research
Interventional research: quasi-experimental and clinical research
Case Report: it is the most common type of descriptive study. It is the examination of a single case having a different quality in the society, e.g. conducting general anaesthesia in a pregnant patient with mucopolysaccharidosis.
Case Series: it is the description of repetitive cases having common features. For instance; case series involving interscapular pain related to neuraxial labour analgesia. Interestingly, malignant hyperthermia cases are not accepted as case series since they are rarely seen during historical development.
Surveillance Studies: these are the results obtained from the databases that follow and record a health problem for a certain time, e.g. the surveillance of cross-infections during anaesthesia in the intensive care unit.

Moreover, some studies may be experimental. After the researcher intervenes, the researcher waits for the result, observes and obtains data. Experimental studies are, more often, in the form of clinical trials or laboratory animal trials ( 2 ).

Analytical observational research can be classified as cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies.

Firstly, the participants are controlled with regard to the disease under investigation. Patients are excluded from the study. Healthy participants are evaluated with regard to the exposure to the effect. Then, the group (cohort) is followed-up for a sufficient period of time with respect to the occurrence of disease, and the progress of disease is studied. The risk of the healthy participants getting sick is considered an incident. In cohort studies, the risk of disease between the groups exposed and not exposed to the effect is calculated and rated. This rate is called relative risk. Relative risk indicates the strength of exposure to the effect on the disease.

Cohort research may be observational and experimental. The follow-up of patients prospectively is called a prospective cohort study . The results are obtained after the research starts. The researcher’s following-up of cohort subjects from a certain point towards the past is called a retrospective cohort study . Prospective cohort studies are more valuable than retrospective cohort studies: this is because in the former, the researcher observes and records the data. The researcher plans the study before the research and determines what data will be used. On the other hand, in retrospective studies, the research is made on recorded data: no new data can be added.

In fact, retrospective and prospective studies are not observational. They determine the relationship between the date on which the researcher has begun the study and the disease development period. The most critical disadvantage of this type of research is that if the follow-up period is long, participants may leave the study at their own behest or due to physical conditions. Cohort studies that begin after exposure and before disease development are called ambidirectional studies . Public healthcare studies generally fall within this group, e.g. lung cancer development in smokers.

Case-Control Studies: these studies are retrospective cohort studies. They examine the cause and effect relationship from the effect to the cause. The detection or determination of data depends on the information recorded in the past. The researcher has no control over the data ( 2 ).

Cross-sectional studies are advantageous since they can be concluded relatively quickly. It may be difficult to obtain a reliable result from such studies for rare diseases ( 2 ).

Cross-sectional studies are characterised by timing. In such studies, the exposure and result are simultaneously evaluated. While cross-sectional studies are restrictedly used in studies involving anaesthesia (since the process of exposure is limited), they can be used in studies conducted in intensive care units.

Quasi-Experimental Research: they are conducted in cases in which a quick result is requested and the participants or research areas cannot be randomised, e.g. giving hand-wash training and comparing the frequency of nosocomial infections before and after hand wash.
Clinical Research: they are prospective studies carried out with a control group for the purpose of comparing the effect and value of an intervention in a clinical case. Clinical study and research have the same meaning. Drugs, invasive interventions, medical devices and operations, diets, physical therapy and diagnostic tools are relevant in this context ( 6 ).

Clinical studies are conducted by a responsible researcher, generally a physician. In the research team, there may be other healthcare staff besides physicians. Clinical studies may be financed by healthcare institutes, drug companies, academic medical centres, volunteer groups, physicians, healthcare service providers and other individuals. They may be conducted in several places including hospitals, universities, physicians’ offices and community clinics based on the researcher’s requirements. The participants are made aware of the duration of the study before their inclusion. Clinical studies should include the evaluation of recommendations (drug, device and surgical) for the treatment of a disease, syndrome or a comparison of one or more applications; finding different ways for recognition of a disease or case and prevention of their recurrence ( 7 ).

Clinical Research

In this review, clinical research is explained in more detail since it is the most valuable study in scientific research.

Clinical research starts with forming a hypothesis. A hypothesis can be defined as a claim put forward about the value of a population parameter based on sampling. There are two types of hypotheses in statistics.

H 0 hypothesis is called a control or null hypothesis. It is the hypothesis put forward in research, which implies that there is no difference between the groups under consideration. If this hypothesis is rejected at the end of the study, it indicates that a difference exists between the two treatments under consideration.
H 1 hypothesis is called an alternative hypothesis. It is hypothesised against a null hypothesis, which implies that a difference exists between the groups under consideration. For example, consider the following hypothesis: drug A has an analgesic effect. Control or null hypothesis (H 0 ): there is no difference between drug A and placebo with regard to the analgesic effect. The alternative hypothesis (H 1 ) is applicable if a difference exists between drug A and placebo with regard to the analgesic effect.

The planning phase comes after the determination of a hypothesis. A clinical research plan is called a protocol . In a protocol, the reasons for research, number and qualities of participants, tests to be applied, study duration and what information to be gathered from the participants should be found and conformity criteria should be developed.

The selection of participant groups to be included in the study is important. Inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study for the participants should be determined. Inclusion criteria should be defined in the form of demographic characteristics (age, gender, etc.) of the participant group and the exclusion criteria as the diseases that may influence the study, age ranges, cases involving pregnancy and lactation, continuously used drugs and participants’ cooperation.

The next stage is methodology. Methodology can be grouped under subheadings, namely, the calculation of number of subjects, blinding (masking), randomisation, selection of operation to be applied, use of placebo and criteria for stopping and changing the treatment.

I. Calculation of the Number of Subjects

The entire source from which the data are obtained is called a universe or population . A small group selected from a certain universe based on certain rules and which is accepted to highly represent the universe from which it is selected is called a sample and the characteristics of the population from which the data are collected are called variables. If data is collected from the entire population, such an instance is called a parameter . Conducting a study on the sample rather than the entire population is easier and less costly. Many factors influence the determination of the sample size. Firstly, the type of variable should be determined. Variables are classified as categorical (qualitative, non-numerical) or numerical (quantitative). Individuals in categorical variables are classified according to their characteristics. Categorical variables are indicated as nominal and ordinal (ordered). In nominal variables, the application of a category depends on the researcher’s preference. For instance, a female participant can be considered first and then the male participant, or vice versa. An ordinal (ordered) variable is ordered from small to large or vice versa (e.g. ordering obese patients based on their weights-from the lightest to the heaviest or vice versa). A categorical variable may have more than one characteristic: such variables are called binary or dichotomous (e.g. a participant may be both female and obese).

If the variable has numerical (quantitative) characteristics and these characteristics cannot be categorised, then it is called a numerical variable. Numerical variables are either discrete or continuous. For example, the number of operations with spinal anaesthesia represents a discrete variable. The haemoglobin value or height represents a continuous variable.

Statistical analyses that need to be employed depend on the type of variable. The determination of variables is necessary for selecting the statistical method as well as software in SPSS. While categorical variables are presented as numbers and percentages, numerical variables are represented using measures such as mean and standard deviation. It may be necessary to use mean in categorising some cases such as the following: even though the variable is categorical (qualitative, non-numerical) when Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is used (since a numerical value is obtained), it is classified as a numerical variable: such variables are averaged.

Clinical research is carried out on the sample and generalised to the population. Accordingly, the number of samples should be correctly determined. Different sample size formulas are used on the basis of the statistical method to be used. When the sample size increases, error probability decreases. The sample size is calculated based on the primary hypothesis. The determination of a sample size before beginning the research specifies the power of the study. Power analysis enables the acquisition of realistic results in the research, and it is used for comparing two or more clinical research methods.

Because of the difference in the formulas used in calculating power analysis and number of samples for clinical research, it facilitates the use of computer programs for making calculations.

It is necessary to know certain parameters in order to calculate the number of samples by power analysis.

Type-I (α) and type-II (β) error levels
Difference between groups (d-difference) and effect size (ES)
Distribution ratio of groups
Direction of research hypothesis (H1)

a. Type-I (α) and Type-II (β) Error (β) Levels

Two types of errors can be made while accepting or rejecting H 0 hypothesis in a hypothesis test. Type-I error (α) level is the probability of finding a difference at the end of the research when there is no difference between the two applications. In other words, it is the rejection of the hypothesis when H 0 is actually correct and it is known as α error or p value. For instance, when the size is determined, type-I error level is accepted as 0.05 or 0.01.

Another error that can be made during a hypothesis test is a type-II error. It is the acceptance of a wrongly hypothesised H 0 hypothesis. In fact, it is the probability of failing to find a difference when there is a difference between the two applications. The power of a test is the ability of that test to find a difference that actually exists. Therefore, it is related to the type-II error level.

Since the type-II error risk is expressed as β, the power of the test is defined as 1–β. When a type-II error is 0.20, the power of the test is 0.80. Type-I (α) and type-II (β) errors can be intentional. The reason to intentionally make such an error is the necessity to look at the events from the opposite perspective.

b. Difference between Groups and ES

ES is defined as the state in which statistical difference also has clinically significance: ES≥0.5 is desirable. The difference between groups is the absolute difference between the groups compared in clinical research.

c. Allocation Ratio of Groups

The allocation ratio of groups is effective in determining the number of samples. If the number of samples is desired to be determined at the lowest level, the rate should be kept as 1/1.

d. Direction of Hypothesis (H1)

The direction of hypothesis in clinical research may be one-sided or two-sided. While one-sided hypotheses hypothesis test differences in the direction of size, two-sided hypotheses hypothesis test differences without direction. The power of the test in two-sided hypotheses is lower than one-sided hypotheses.

After these four variables are determined, they are entered in the appropriate computer program and the number of samples is calculated. Statistical packaged software programs such as Statistica, NCSS and G-Power may be used for power analysis and calculating the number of samples. When the samples size is calculated, if there is a decrease in α, difference between groups, ES and number of samples, then the standard deviation increases and power decreases. The power in two-sided hypothesis is lower. It is ethically appropriate to consider the determination of sample size, particularly in animal experiments, at the beginning of the study. The phase of the study is also important in the determination of number of subjects to be included in drug studies. Usually, phase-I studies are used to determine the safety profile of a drug or product, and they are generally conducted on a few healthy volunteers. If no unacceptable toxicity is detected during phase-I studies, phase-II studies may be carried out. Phase-II studies are proof-of-concept studies conducted on a larger number (100–500) of volunteer patients. When the effectiveness of the drug or product is evident in phase-II studies, phase-III studies can be initiated. These are randomised, double-blinded, placebo or standard treatment-controlled studies. Volunteer patients are periodically followed-up with respect to the effectiveness and side effects of the drug. It can generally last 1–4 years and is valuable during licensing and releasing the drug to the general market. Then, phase-IV studies begin in which long-term safety is investigated (indication, dose, mode of application, safety, effectiveness, etc.) on thousands of volunteer patients.

II. Blinding (Masking) and Randomisation Methods

When the methodology of clinical research is prepared, precautions should be taken to prevent taking sides. For this reason, techniques such as randomisation and blinding (masking) are used. Comparative studies are the most ideal ones in clinical research.

Blinding Method

A case in which the treatments applied to participants of clinical research should be kept unknown is called the blinding method . If the participant does not know what it receives, it is called a single-blind study; if even the researcher does not know, it is called a double-blind study. When there is a probability of knowing which drug is given in the order of application, when uninformed staff administers the drug, it is called in-house blinding. In case the study drug is known in its pharmaceutical form, a double-dummy blinding test is conducted. Intravenous drug is given to one group and a placebo tablet is given to the comparison group; then, the placebo tablet is given to the group that received the intravenous drug and intravenous drug in addition to placebo tablet is given to the comparison group. In this manner, each group receives both the intravenous and tablet forms of the drug. In case a third party interested in the study is involved and it also does not know about the drug (along with the statistician), it is called third-party blinding.

Randomisation Method

The selection of patients for the study groups should be random. Randomisation methods are used for such selection, which prevent conscious or unconscious manipulations in the selection of patients ( 8 ).

No factor pertaining to the patient should provide preference of one treatment to the other during randomisation. This characteristic is the most important difference separating randomised clinical studies from prospective and synchronous studies with experimental groups. Randomisation strengthens the study design and enables the determination of reliable scientific knowledge ( 2 ).

The easiest method is simple randomisation, e.g. determination of the type of anaesthesia to be administered to a patient by tossing a coin. In this method, when the number of samples is kept high, a balanced distribution is created. When the number of samples is low, there will be an imbalance between the groups. In this case, stratification and blocking have to be added to randomisation. Stratification is the classification of patients one or more times according to prognostic features determined by the researcher and blocking is the selection of a certain number of patients for each stratification process. The number of stratification processes should be determined at the beginning of the study.

As the number of stratification processes increases, performing the study and balancing the groups become difficult. For this reason, stratification characteristics and limitations should be effectively determined at the beginning of the study. It is not mandatory for the stratifications to have equal intervals. Despite all the precautions, an imbalance might occur between the groups before beginning the research. In such circumstances, post-stratification or restandardisation may be conducted according to the prognostic factors.

The main characteristic of applying blinding (masking) and randomisation is the prevention of bias. Therefore, it is worthwhile to comprehensively examine bias at this stage.

Bias and Chicanery

While conducting clinical research, errors can be introduced voluntarily or involuntarily at a number of stages, such as design, population selection, calculating the number of samples, non-compliance with study protocol, data entry and selection of statistical method. Bias is taking sides of individuals in line with their own decisions, views and ideological preferences ( 9 ). In order for an error to lead to bias, it has to be a systematic error. Systematic errors in controlled studies generally cause the results of one group to move in a different direction as compared to the other. It has to be understood that scientific research is generally prone to errors. However, random errors (or, in other words, ‘the luck factor’-in which bias is unintended-do not lead to bias ( 10 ).

Another issue, which is different from bias, is chicanery. It is defined as voluntarily changing the interventions, results and data of patients in an unethical manner or copying data from other studies. Comparatively, bias may not be done consciously.

In case unexpected results or outliers are found while the study is analysed, if possible, such data should be re-included into the study since the complete exclusion of data from a study endangers its reliability. In such a case, evaluation needs to be made with and without outliers. It is insignificant if no difference is found. However, if there is a difference, the results with outliers are re-evaluated. If there is no error, then the outlier is included in the study (as the outlier may be a result). It should be noted that re-evaluation of data in anaesthesiology is not possible.

Statistical evaluation methods should be determined at the design stage so as not to encounter unexpected results in clinical research. The data should be evaluated before the end of the study and without entering into details in research that are time-consuming and involve several samples. This is called an interim analysis . The date of interim analysis should be determined at the beginning of the study. The purpose of making interim analysis is to prevent unnecessary cost and effort since it may be necessary to conclude the research after the interim analysis, e.g. studies in which there is no possibility to validate the hypothesis at the end or the occurrence of different side effects of the drug to be used. The accuracy of the hypothesis and number of samples are compared. Statistical significance levels in interim analysis are very important. If the data level is significant, the hypothesis is validated even if the result turns out to be insignificant after the date of the analysis.

Another important point to be considered is the necessity to conclude the participants’ treatment within the period specified in the study protocol. When the result of the study is achieved earlier and unexpected situations develop, the treatment is concluded earlier. Moreover, the participant may quit the study at its own behest, may die or unpredictable situations (e.g. pregnancy) may develop. The participant can also quit the study whenever it wants, even if the study has not ended ( 7 ).

In case the results of a study are contrary to already known or expected results, the expected quality level of the study suggesting the contradiction may be higher than the studies supporting what is known in that subject. This type of bias is called confirmation bias. The presence of well-known mechanisms and logical inference from them may create problems in the evaluation of data. This is called plausibility bias.

Another type of bias is expectation bias. If a result different from the known results has been achieved and it is against the editor’s will, it can be challenged. Bias may be introduced during the publication of studies, such as publishing only positive results, selection of study results in a way to support a view or prevention of their publication. Some editors may only publish research that extols only the positive results or results that they desire.

Bias may be introduced for advertisement or economic reasons. Economic pressure may be applied on the editor, particularly in the cases of studies involving drugs and new medical devices. This is called commercial bias.

In recent years, before beginning a study, it has been recommended to record it on the Web site www.clinicaltrials.gov for the purpose of facilitating systematic interpretation and analysis in scientific research, informing other researchers, preventing bias, provision of writing in a standard format, enhancing contribution of research results to the general literature and enabling early intervention of an institution for support. This Web site is a service of the US National Institutes of Health.

The last stage in the methodology of clinical studies is the selection of intervention to be conducted. Placebo use assumes an important place in interventions. In Latin, placebo means ‘I will be fine’. In medical literature, it refers to substances that are not curative, do not have active ingredients and have various pharmaceutical forms. Although placebos do not have active drug characteristic, they have shown effective analgesic characteristics, particularly in algology applications; further, its use prevents bias in comparative studies. If a placebo has a positive impact on a participant, it is called the placebo effect ; on the contrary, if it has a negative impact, it is called the nocebo effect . Another type of therapy that can be used in clinical research is sham application. Although a researcher does not cure the patient, the researcher may compare those who receive therapy and undergo sham. It has been seen that sham therapies also exhibit a placebo effect. In particular, sham therapies are used in acupuncture applications ( 11 ). While placebo is a substance, sham is a type of clinical application.

Ethically, the patient has to receive appropriate therapy. For this reason, if its use prevents effective treatment, it causes great problem with regard to patient health and legalities.

Before medical research is conducted with human subjects, predictable risks, drawbacks and benefits must be evaluated for individuals or groups participating in the study. Precautions must be taken for reducing the risk to a minimum level. The risks during the study should be followed, evaluated and recorded by the researcher ( 1 ).

After the methodology for a clinical study is determined, dealing with the ‘Ethics Committee’ forms the next stage. The purpose of the ethics committee is to protect the rights, safety and well-being of volunteers taking part in the clinical research, considering the scientific method and concerns of society. The ethics committee examines the studies presented in time, comprehensively and independently, with regard to ethics and science; in line with the Declaration of Helsinki and following national and international standards concerning ‘Good Clinical Practice’. The method to be followed in the formation of the ethics committee should be developed without any kind of prejudice and to examine the applications with regard to ethics and science within the framework of the ethics committee, Regulation on Clinical Trials and Good Clinical Practice ( www.iku.com ). The necessary documents to be presented to the ethics committee are research protocol, volunteer consent form, budget contract, Declaration of Helsinki, curriculum vitae of researchers, similar or explanatory literature samples, supporting institution approval certificate and patient follow-up form.

Only one sister/brother, mother, father, son/daughter and wife/husband can take charge in the same ethics committee. A rector, vice rector, dean, deputy dean, provincial healthcare director and chief physician cannot be members of the ethics committee.

Members of the ethics committee can work as researchers or coordinators in clinical research. However, during research meetings in which members of the ethics committee are researchers or coordinators, they must leave the session and they cannot sign-off on decisions. If the number of members in the ethics committee for a particular research is so high that it is impossible to take a decision, the clinical research is presented to another ethics committee in the same province. If there is no ethics committee in the same province, an ethics committee in the closest settlement is found.

Thereafter, researchers need to inform the participants using an informed consent form. This form should explain the content of clinical study, potential benefits of the study, alternatives and risks (if any). It should be easy, comprehensible, conforming to spelling rules and written in plain language understandable by the participant.

This form assists the participants in taking a decision regarding participation in the study. It should aim to protect the participants. The participant should be included in the study only after it signs the informed consent form; the participant can quit the study whenever required, even when the study has not ended ( 7 ).

Peer-review: Externally peer-reviewed.

Author Contributions: Concept - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.; Design - C.Ö.Ç.; Supervision - A.D.; Resource - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.; Materials - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.; Analysis and/or Interpretation - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.; Literature Search - C.Ö.Ç.; Writing Manuscript - C.Ö.Ç.; Critical Review - A.D.; Other - C.Ö.Ç., A.D.

Conflict of Interest: No conflict of interest was declared by the authors.

Financial Disclosure: The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.

Facility for Rare Isotope Beams

At michigan state university, international research team uses wavefunction matching to solve quantum many-body problems, new approach makes calculations with realistic interactions possible.

FRIB researchers are part of an international research team solving challenging computational problems in quantum physics using a new method called wavefunction matching. The new approach has applications to fields such as nuclear physics, where it is enabling theoretical calculations of atomic nuclei that were previously not possible. The details are published in Nature (“Wavefunction matching for solving quantum many-body problems”) .

Ab initio methods and their computational challenges

An ab initio method describes a complex system by starting from a description of its elementary components and their interactions. For the case of nuclear physics, the elementary components are protons and neutrons. Some key questions that ab initio calculations can help address are the binding energies and properties of atomic nuclei not yet observed and linking nuclear structure to the underlying interactions among protons and neutrons.

Yet, some ab initio methods struggle to produce reliable calculations for systems with complex interactions. One such method is quantum Monte Carlo simulations. In quantum Monte Carlo simulations, quantities are computed using random or stochastic processes. While quantum Monte Carlo simulations can be efficient and powerful, they have a significant weakness: the sign problem. The sign problem develops when positive and negative weight contributions cancel each other out. This cancellation results in inaccurate final predictions. It is often the case that quantum Monte Carlo simulations can be performed for an approximate or simplified interaction, but the corresponding simulations for realistic interactions produce severe sign problems and are therefore not possible.

Using ‘plastic surgery’ to make calculations possible

The new wavefunction-matching approach is designed to solve such computational problems. The research team—from Gaziantep Islam Science and Technology University in Turkey; University of Bonn, Ruhr University Bochum, and Forschungszentrum Jülich in Germany; Institute for Basic Science in South Korea; South China Normal University, Sun Yat-Sen University, and Graduate School of China Academy of Engineering Physics in China; Tbilisi State University in Georgia; CEA Paris-Saclay and Université Paris-Saclay in France; and Mississippi State University and the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) at Michigan State University (MSU)—includes Dean Lee , professor of physics at FRIB and in MSU’s Department of Physics and Astronomy and head of the Theoretical Nuclear Science department at FRIB, and Yuan-Zhuo Ma , postdoctoral research associate at FRIB.

“We are often faced with the situation that we can perform calculations using a simple approximate interaction, but realistic high-fidelity interactions cause severe computational problems,” said Lee. “Wavefunction matching solves this problem by doing plastic surgery. It removes the short-distance part of the high-fidelity interaction, and replaces it with the short-distance part of an easily computable interaction.”

This transformation is done in a way that preserves all of the important properties of the original realistic interaction. Since the new wavefunctions look similar to that of the easily computable interaction, researchers can now perform calculations using the easily computable interaction and apply a standard procedure for handling small corrections called perturbation theory. A team effort

The research team applied this new method to lattice quantum Monte Carlo simulations for light nuclei, medium-mass nuclei, neutron matter, and nuclear matter. Using precise ab initio calculations, the results closely matched real-world data on nuclear properties such as size, structure, and binding energies. Calculations that were once impossible due to the sign problem can now be performed using wavefunction matching.

“It is a fantastic project and an excellent opportunity to work with the brightest nuclear scientist s in FRIB and around the globe,” said Ma. “As a theorist , I'm also very excited about programming and conducting research on the world's most powerful exascale supercomputers, such as Frontier , which allows us to implement wavefunction matching to explore the mysteries of nuclear physics.”

While the research team focused solely on quantum Monte Carlo simulations, wavefunction matching should be useful for many different ab initio approaches, including both classical and quantum computing calculations. The researchers at FRIB worked with collaborators at institutions in China, France, Germany, South Korea, Turkey, and United States.

“The work is the culmination of effort over many years to handle the computational problems associated with realistic high-fidelity nuclear interactions,” said Lee. “It is very satisfying to see that the computational problems are cleanly resolved with this new approach. We are grateful to all of the collaboration members who contributed to this project, in particular, the lead author, Serdar Elhatisari.”

This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. National Science Foundation, the German Research Foundation, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Chinese Academy of Sciences President’s International Fellowship Initiative, Volkswagen Stiftung, the European Research Council, the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the National Security Academic Fund, the Rare Isotope Science Project of the Institute for Basic Science, the National Research Foundation of Korea, the Institute for Basic Science, and the Espace de Structure et de réactions Nucléaires Théorique.

Michigan State University operates the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) as a user facility for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC), supporting the mission of the DOE-SC Office of Nuclear Physics. Hosting what is designed to be the most powerful heavy-ion accelerator, FRIB enables scientists to make discoveries about the properties of rare isotopes in order to better understand the physics of nuclei, nuclear astrophysics, fundamental interactions, and applications for society, including in medicine, homeland security, and industry.

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States and is working to address some of today’s most pressing challenges. For more information, visit energy.gov/science.

NTRS - NASA Technical Reports Server

Available downloads, related records.

IMAGES

Infographic: Steps in the Research Process
Why is Research Important for Undergraduate Students?
What is Research
What Is the Importance of Research? 5 Reasons Why Research is Critical
What is Research?
SOLUTION: Importance of research in daily life

VIDEO

Research Profile 1: Why is it so important?
Importance of Research
Why is research important in palliative care and hospices?
Importance of Research
Importance of Research
Importance of Research in Nursing part 1

COMMENTS

7 Reasons Why Research Is Important
Why Research Is Necessary and Valuable in Our Daily Lives. It's a tool for building knowledge and facilitating learning. It's a means to understand issues and increase public awareness. It helps us succeed in business. It allows us to disprove lies and support truths. It is a means to find, gauge, and seize opportunities.
What Is Research, and Why Do People Do It?
Abstractspiepr Abs1. Every day people do research as they gather information to learn about something of interest. In the scientific world, however, research means something different than simply gathering information. Scientific research is characterized by its careful planning and observing, by its relentless efforts to understand and explain ...
2.1 Why is Research Important
Discuss how scientific research guides public policy. Appreciate how scientific research can be important in making personal decisions. Scientific research is a critical tool for successfully navigating our complex world. Without it, we would be forced to rely solely on intuition, other people's authority, and blind luck.
Explaining How Research Works
Placing research in the bigger context of its field and where it fits into the scientific process can help people better understand and interpret new findings as they emerge. A single study usually uncovers only a piece of a larger puzzle. Questions about how the world works are often investigated on many different levels.
PDF Why research is important
Why research is important 3 concepts or constructs. A piece of research is embedded in a frame-work or way of seeing the world. Second, research involves the application of a method, which has been designed to achieve knowledge that is as valid and truthful as possible. 4 The products of research are propositions or statements. There is a
Why does research matter?
Abstract. A working knowledge of research - both how it is done, and how it can be used - is important for everyone involved in direct patient care and the planning & delivery of eye programmes. A research coordinator collecting data from a health extension worker. ethiopia. The mention of 'research' can be off-putting and may seem ...
10 Reasons Why Research is Important
Here are ten reasons why research is important: #1. Research expands your knowledge base. The most obvious reason to do research is that you'll learn more. There's always more to learn about a topic, even if you are already well-versed in it. If you aren't, research allows you to build on any personal experience you have with the subject.
Six Reasons Why Research Is Important
2- Research Helps in Problem-solving. The goal of the research is to broaden our understanding. Research gives us the information and knowledge to solve problems and make decisions. To differentiate between research that attempts to advance our knowledge and research that seeks to apply pre-existing information to real-world situations.
Undergraduate Research: Importance, Benefits, and Challenges
The ability to integrate theory and practice. However, participation in an undergraduate research experience also benefited students in areas that can reach beyond academia ( 3 ). Having tolerance for obstacles. Learning to work independently. Understanding how knowledge is constructed.
What Is Research and Why We Do It
According to the OECD Frascati Manual [], research comprises "creative and systematic work undertaken in order to increase the stock of knowledge—including knowledge of humankind, culture and society—and to devise new applications of available knowledge."This book is mainly concerned with scientific and technological research, that is research that covers the whole spectrum—from ...
2.1 Why Is Research Important?
Psychological research has a long history involving important figures from diverse backgrounds. While the introductory chapter discussed several researchers who made significant contributions to the discipline, there are many more individuals who deserve attention in considering how psychology has advanced as a science through their work ...
What Is the Importance of Research? 5 Reasons Why Research is Critical
Builds up credibility. People are willing to listen and trust someone with new information on one condition - it's backed up. And that's exactly where research comes in. Conducting studies on new and unfamiliar subjects, and achieving the desired or expected outcome, can help people accept the unknown.
11.1 The Purpose of Research Writing
Research Writing at Work Knowing how to write a good research paper is a valuable skill that will serve you well throughout your career. Whether you are developing a new product, studying the best way to perform a procedure, or learning about challenges and opportunities in your field of employment, you will use research techniques to guide ...
Research Skills: What They Are and Why They're Important
Critical thinking. Critical thinking refers to a person's ability to think rationally and analyze and interpret information and make connections. This skill is important in research because it allows individuals to better gather and evaluate data and establish significance. Common critical thinking skills include: Open-mindedness.
Why should I do research? Is it a waste of time?
Research is the most important activity to achieve scientific progress. Although it is an easy process on a theoretical basis, practically it is a laborious process, and full commitment and dedication are of paramount importance. ... Furthermore, it helps doctors of a particular specialty to understand better the scientific work of other ...
A Beginner's Guide to Starting the Research Process
Step 4: Create a research design. The research design is a practical framework for answering your research questions. It involves making decisions about the type of data you need, the methods you'll use to collect and analyze it, and the location and timescale of your research. There are often many possible paths you can take to answering ...
Why is Research Important?
Research is fundamental to advances in human society. It emerges from our innate desire as human beings to seek to improve our lives and to control the world around us. To do this we have to improve our understanding and our insight - we have to know how things work (or don't work) so that we can find different ways to use them or make them ...
(PDF) Social Work Research and Its Relevance to Practice: "The Gap
The history of social work education may have also contributed to making it difficult for those teaching on university social work courses to engage routinely in research (Orme and Powell, 2007).
Research Methods
Research methods are specific procedures for collecting and analyzing data. Developing your research methods is an integral part of your research design. When planning your methods, there are two key decisions you will make. First, decide how you will collect data. Your methods depend on what type of data you need to answer your research question:
Significance of Research Process in Research Work
Abstract. Research process consists of a series of steps or actions required for effectively conducting research while formulating the research problem, extensive literature survey, developing hypothesis, preparing the research design, determining sample design, collecting data, execution of the project, analysis of data, hypothesis testing ...
The Role Of Research At Universities: Why It Matters
Strength in research helps to define a university's "brand" in the national and international marketplace, impacting everything from student recruitment, to faculty retention, to attracting ...
How to effectively explain why my research is important?
Many researchers struggle to communicate the significance of their work to a broader audience. This question on academia.stackexchange.com asks for advice on how to effectively explain why one's research is important, and receives several helpful answers from experienced academics. The answers cover topics such as identifying the problem, the gap, and the contribution of the research, using ...
Maintaining health and well-being as we age
Having strong social connections is especially important for mental health and well-being as we age, and is associated with lower instances of depression and anxiety. Simon Fraser University (SFU) professor of mental health and aging Theodore D. Cosco researches a range of factors that promote healthy aging and resilience in older adults, from ...
Children's Participation in Child Welfare: A Systematic Review of
Research on Social Work Practice: Systematic review. (PRISMA) 12: 2009-2019: Children's participation in decision making is generally limited or non-existent. The age of the child is an important determining factor concerning whether the child is given the opportunity to participate in decision making.
Enchancing country-level impact for health policy and systems research
At a recent webinar hosted by the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, global health experts gathered to discuss the critical role of health policy and systems research in advancing country-specific health priorities. The event, Aiming for impact: embedding health policy and systems research to advance country priorities, also marked the launch of the Alliance's new five-year ...
Birth by C-section more than doubles odds of measles vaccine failure
Researchers say it is vital that children born by caesarean section receive two doses of the measles vaccine for robust protection against the disease. A study by the University of Cambridge, UK, and Fudan University, China, has found that a single dose of the measles jab is up to 2.6 times more likely to be completely ineffective in children ...
About Public Health Workforce Development
Important things to know. Decades of underinvestment have undermined the public health workforce—America's first line of defense against disease outbreaks and other health threats. With diminished funding and hiring barriers, health departments at state, local, tribal and territorial levels are unable to recruit and retain skilled professionals.
What is Scientific Research and How Can it be Done?
Analytical Scientific Research: the most important difference of this and the descriptive research is the presence of a comparison group. They are categorised as observational and interventional research. ... Members of the ethics committee can work as researchers or coordinators in clinical research. However, during research meetings in which ...
International research team uses wavefunction matching to solve quantum
New approach makes calculations with realistic interactions possibleFRIB researchers are part of an international research team solving challenging computational problems in quantum physics using a new method called wavefunction matching. The new approach has applications to fields such as nuclear physics, where it is enabling theoretical calculations of atomic nuclei that were previously not ...
NTRS
With an increased demand on reducing the time, cost, and effort to develop new materials, Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME) has received widespread attention in various engineering disciplines as a catalyst for significantly reducing experimental testing during the material design process. An ICME approach to design can enable 'fit-for-purpose' materials to be realized ...

2.1 Why is Research Important

USE OF RESEARCH INFORMATION

THE PROCESS OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

Answers to Exercises

Share This Book

You are here

Explaining How Research Works

Connect with Us

10 Reasons Why Research is Important

#1. Research expands your knowledge base

#2. Research gives you the latest information

#3. Research helps you know what you’re up against

#4. Research builds your credibility

#5. Research helps you narrow your scope

#6. Research teaches you better discernment

#7. Research introduces you to new ideas

#8. Research helps with problem-solving

#9. Research helps you reach people

#10. Research encourages curiosity

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

KNOWLEDGE NETWORK

Six Reasons Why Research is Important

What is the Importance of Research?

Reasons for the Importance of Research

1- Acquire Knowledge Efficiently through Research

2- Research Helps in Problem-solving

3- Research Provides the Latest Information

4- Research Builds Credibility

5- Research Helps in Business Success

6- Research Discover and Seize Opportunities

How to Improve Your Research Skills

Identify Reliable Source

Validate Information from Various Sources

Facilitates Learning Process

Stay Organized

Make Use of the library's Resources

of Conducting Research

Live Classes Schedule

Get Exclusive Research Tips in Your Inbox

What Is Research and Why We Do It

Cite this chapter

Access this chapter

Author information

Corresponding author

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Download citation

Share this chapter

2.1 Why Is Research Important?

Use of Research Information

Link to Learning

NOTABLE RESEARCHERS

The Process of Scientific Research

What Is the Importance of Research? 5 Reasons Why Research is Critical

The Importance Of Health Research

What Is The Importance Of Clinical Research?

Five Reasons Why Research is Critical

The Importance Of Research To Students

The Importance Of Research Methodology

The Importance Of Qualitative Research

The Process Of Scientific Research

What Is The Importance Of Research In Everyday Life?

Related Articles:

Featured Articles

11.1 The Purpose of Research Writing

Reasons for Research

Research Writing and the Academic Paper

Research Writing at Work

Writing at Work

Steps of the Research Writing Process

Step 1: Choosing a Topic

Step 2: Planning and Scheduling

Step 3: Conducting Research

Step 4: Organizing Research and the Writer’s Ideas

Step 5: Drafting Your Paper

Step 6: Revising and Editing Your Paper

Key Takeaways

More From Forbes

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024