12.7 Evaluation: Effectiveness of Research Paper

Learning outcomes.

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

  • Identify common formats and design features for different kinds of texts.
  • Implement style and language consistent with argumentative research writing while maintaining your own voice.
  • Determine how genre conventions for structure, paragraphing, tone, and mechanics vary.

When drafting, you follow your strongest research interests and try to answer the question on which you have settled. However, sometimes what began as a paper about one thing becomes a paper about something else. Your peer review partner will have helped you identify any such issues and given you some insight regarding revision. Another strategy is to compare and contrast your draft with the grading rubric similar to one your instructor will use. It is a good idea to consult this rubric frequently throughout the drafting process.

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/writing-guide/pages/1-unit-introduction
  • Authors: Michelle Bachelor Robinson, Maria Jerskey, featuring Toby Fulwiler
  • Publisher/website: OpenStax
  • Book title: Writing Guide with Handbook
  • Publication date: Dec 21, 2021
  • Location: Houston, Texas
  • Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/writing-guide/pages/1-unit-introduction
  • Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/writing-guide/pages/12-7-evaluation-effectiveness-of-research-paper

© Dec 19, 2023 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.

Banner

Evaluating Research Articles

Understanding research statistics, critical appraisal.

A medical professional checks a patient's blood pressure.

Imagine for a moment that you are trying to answer a clinical (PICO) question regarding one of your patients/clients. Do you know how to determine if a research study is of high quality? Can you tell if it is applicable to your question? In evidence based practice, there are many things to look for in an article that will reveal its quality and relevance. This guide is a collection of resources and activities that will help you learn how to evaluate articles efficiently and accurately.

Is health research new to you? Or perhaps you're a little out of practice with reading it? The following questions will help illuminate an article's strengths or shortcomings. Ask them of yourself as you are reading an article:

  • Is the article peer reviewed?
  • Are there any conflicts of interest based on the author's affiliation or the funding source of the research?
  • Are the research questions or objectives clearly defined?
  • Is the study a systematic review or meta analysis?
  • Is the study design appropriate for the research question?
  • Is the sample size justified? Do the authors explain how it is representative of the wider population?
  • Do the researchers describe the setting of data collection?
  • Does the paper clearly describe the measurements used?
  • Did the researchers use appropriate statistical measures?
  • Are the research questions or objectives answered?
  • Did the researchers account for confounding factors?
  • Have the researchers only drawn conclusions about the groups represented in the research?
  • Have the authors declared any conflicts of interest?

If the answer to these questions about an article you are reading are mostly YESes , then it's likely that the article is of decent quality. If the answers are most NOs , then it may be a good idea to move on to another article. If the YESes and NOs are roughly even, you'll have to decide for yourself if the article is good enough quality for you. Some factors, like a poor literature review, are not as important as the researchers neglecting to describe the measurements they used. As you read more research, you'll be able to more easily identify research that is well done vs. that which is not well done.

research paper evaluation format

Determining if a research study has used appropriate statistical measures is one of the most critical and difficult steps in evaluating an article. The following links are great, quick resources for helping to better understand how to use statistics in health research.

research paper evaluation format

  • How to read a paper: Statistics for the non-statistician. II: “Significant” relations and their pitfalls This article continues the checklist of questions that will help you to appraise the statistical validity of a paper. Greenhalgh Trisha. How to read a paper: Statistics for the non-statistician. II: “Significant” relations and their pitfalls BMJ 1997; 315 :422 *On the PMC PDF, you need to scroll past the first article to get to this one.*
  • A consumer's guide to subgroup analysis The extent to which a clinician should believe and act on the results of subgroup analyses of data from randomized trials or meta-analyses is controversial. Guidelines are provided in this paper for making these decisions.

Statistical Versus Clinical Significance

When appraising studies, it's important to consider both the clinical and statistical significance of the research. This video offers a quick explanation of why.

If you have a little more time, this video explores statistical and clinical significance in more detail, including examples of how to calculate an effect size.

  • Statistical vs. Clinical Significance Transcript Transcript document for the Statistical vs. Clinical Significance video.
  • Effect Size Transcript Transcript document for the Effect Size video.
  • P Values, Statistical Significance & Clinical Significance This handout also explains clinical and statistical significance.
  • Absolute versus relative risk – making sense of media stories Understanding the difference between relative and absolute risk is essential to understanding statistical tests commonly found in research articles.

Critical appraisal is the process of systematically evaluating research using established and transparent methods. In critical appraisal, health professionals use validated checklists/worksheets as tools to guide their assessment of the research. It is a more advanced way of evaluating research than the more basic method explained above. To learn more about critical appraisal or to access critical appraisal tools, visit the websites below.

research paper evaluation format

  • Last Updated: Mar 19, 2024 1:28 PM
  • URL: https://libguides.massgeneral.org/evaluatingarticles

research paper evaluation format

Banner

RCE 672: Research and Program Evaluation: APA Sample Paper

  • Tips for GALILEO
  • Evaluate Sources
  • How to Paraphrase
  • APA Citations
  • APA References
  • Book with Editor(s)
  • Book with No Author
  • Book with Organization as Author
  • Chapters and Parts of Books
  • Company Reports
  • Journal Article
  • Magazine Article
  • Patents & Laws
  • Unpublished Manuscripts/Informal Publications (i.e. course packets and dissertations)
  • APA Sample Paper
  • Paper Formatting (APA)
  • Zotero Citation Tool

Contact Info

[email protected]

229-227-6959

Make an appointment with a Librarian  

Make an appointment with a Tutor 

Follow us on:

research paper evaluation format

APA Sample Paper from the Purdue OWL

  • The Purdue OWL has an APA Sample Paper available on its website.
  • << Previous: Websites
  • Next: Paper Formatting (APA) >>
  • Last Updated: Jul 10, 2023 12:59 PM
  • URL: https://libguides.thomasu.edu/RCE672

Banner

Research Paper: A step-by-step guide: 7. Evaluating Sources

  • 1. Getting Started
  • 2. Topic Ideas
  • 3. Thesis Statement & Outline
  • 4. Appropriate Sources
  • 5. Search Techniques
  • 6. Taking Notes & Documenting Sources
  • 7. Evaluating Sources
  • 8. Citations & Plagiarism
  • 9. Writing Your Research Paper

alt=" "

Evaluation Criteria

It's very important to evaluate the materials you find to make sure they are appropriate for a research paper.  It's not enough that the information is relevant; it must also be credible.  You will want to find more than enough resources, so that you can pick and choose the best for your paper.   Here are some helpful criteria you can apply to the information you find:

C urrency :

  • When was the information published?
  • Is the source out-of-date for the topic? 
  • Are there new discoveries or important events since the publication date?

R elevancy:

  • How is the information related to your argument? 
  • Is the information too advanced or too simple? 
  • Is the audience focus appropriate for a research paper? 
  • Are there better sources elsewhere?

A uthority :

  • Who is the author? 
  • What is the author's credential in the related field? 
  • Is the publisher well-known in the field? 
  • Did the information go through the peer-review process or some kind of fact-checking?

A ccuracy :

  • Can the information be verified? 
  • Are sources cited? 
  • Is the information factual or opinion based?
  • Is the information biased? 
  • Is the information free of grammatical or spelling errors?
  • What is the motive of providing the information: to inform? to sell? to persuade? to entertain?
  • Does the author or publisher make their intentions clear? Who is the intended audience?

Evaluating Web Sources

Most web pages are not fact-checked or anything like that, so it's especially important to evaluate information you find on the web.  Many articles on websites are fine for information, and many others are distorted or made up.  Check out our media evaluation guide for tips on evaluating what you see on social media, news sites, blogs, and so on.

This three-part video series, in which university students, historians, and pro fact-checkers go head-to-head in checking out online information, is also helpful.

  • << Previous: 6. Taking Notes & Documenting Sources
  • Next: 8. Citations & Plagiarism >>
  • Last Updated: Apr 18, 2023 12:12 PM
  • URL: https://butte.libguides.com/ResearchPaper

Book cover

Being a Researcher pp 93–110 Cite as

Research Evaluation

  • Carlo Ghezzi 2  
  • First Online: 23 June 2020

961 Accesses

1 Citations

  • The original version of this chapter was revised. A correction to this chapter can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45157-8_7

This chapter is about research evaluation. Evaluation is quintessential to research. It is traditionally performed through qualitative expert judgement. The chapter presents the main evaluation activities in which researchers can be engaged. It also introduces the current efforts towards devising quantitative research evaluation based on bibliometric indicators and critically discusses their limitations, along with their possible (limited and careful) use.

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

Buying options

  • 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

Change history

19 october 2021.

The original version of the chapter was inadvertently published with an error. The chapter has now been corrected.

Notice that the taxonomy presented in Box 5.1 does not cover all kinds of scientific papers. As an example, it does not cover survey papers, which normally are not submitted to a conference.

Private institutions and industry may follow different schemes.

Adler, R., Ewing, J., Taylor, P.: Citation statistics: A report from the international mathematical union (imu) in cooperation with the international council of industrial and applied mathematics (iciam) and the institute of mathematical statistics (ims). Statistical Science 24 (1), 1–14 (2009). URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/20697661

Esposito, F., Ghezzi, C., Hermenegildo, M., Kirchner, H., Ong, L.: Informatics Research Evaluation. Informatics Europe (2018). URL https://www.informatics-europe.org/publications.html

Friedman, B., Schneider, F.B.: Incentivizing quality and impact: Evaluating scholarship in hiring, tenure, and promotion. Computing Research Association (2016). URL https://cra.org/resources/best-practice-memos/incentivizing-quality-and-impact-evaluating-scholarship-in-hiring-tenure-and-promotion/

Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., Rafols, I.: Bibliometrics: The leiden manifesto for research metrics. Nature News 520 (7548), 429 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a . URL http://www.nature.com/news/bibliometrics-the-leiden-manifesto-for-research-metrics-1.17351

Parnas, D.L.: Stop the numbers game. Commun. ACM 50 (11), 19–21 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1145/1297797.1297815 . URL http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1297797.1297815

Patterson, D., Snyder, L., Ullman, J.: Evaluating computer scientists and engineers for promotion and tenure. Computing Research Association (1999). URL https://cra.org/resources/best-practice-memos/incentivizing-quality-and-impact-evaluating-scholarship-in-hiring-tenure-and-promotion/

Saenen, B., Borrell-Damian, L.: Reflections on University Research Assessment: key concepts, issues and actors. European University Association (2019). URL https://eua.eu/component/attachments/attachments.html?id=2144

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

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Ghezzi, C. (2020). Research Evaluation. In: Being a Researcher. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45157-8_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45157-8_5

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

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

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

How to Write a Peer Review

research paper evaluation format

When you write a peer review for a manuscript, what should you include in your comments? What should you leave out? And how should the review be formatted?

This guide provides quick tips for writing and organizing your reviewer report.

Review Outline

Use an outline for your reviewer report so it’s easy for the editors and author to follow. This will also help you keep your comments organized.

Think about structuring your review like an inverted pyramid. Put the most important information at the top, followed by details and examples in the center, and any additional points at the very bottom.

research paper evaluation format

Here’s how your outline might look:

1. Summary of the research and your overall impression

In your own words, summarize what the manuscript claims to report. This shows the editor how you interpreted the manuscript and will highlight any major differences in perspective between you and the other reviewers. Give an overview of the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses. Think about this as your “take-home” message for the editors. End this section with your recommended course of action.

2. Discussion of specific areas for improvement

It’s helpful to divide this section into two parts: one for major issues and one for minor issues. Within each section, you can talk about the biggest issues first or go systematically figure-by-figure or claim-by-claim. Number each item so that your points are easy to follow (this will also make it easier for the authors to respond to each point). Refer to specific lines, pages, sections, or figure and table numbers so the authors (and editors) know exactly what you’re talking about.

Major vs. minor issues

What’s the difference between a major and minor issue? Major issues should consist of the essential points the authors need to address before the manuscript can proceed. Make sure you focus on what is  fundamental for the current study . In other words, it’s not helpful to recommend additional work that would be considered the “next step” in the study. Minor issues are still important but typically will not affect the overall conclusions of the manuscript. Here are some examples of what would might go in the “minor” category:

  • Missing references (but depending on what is missing, this could also be a major issue)
  • Technical clarifications (e.g., the authors should clarify how a reagent works)
  • Data presentation (e.g., the authors should present p-values differently)
  • Typos, spelling, grammar, and phrasing issues

3. Any other points

Confidential comments for the editors.

Some journals have a space for reviewers to enter confidential comments about the manuscript. Use this space to mention concerns about the submission that you’d want the editors to consider before sharing your feedback with the authors, such as concerns about ethical guidelines or language quality. Any serious issues should be raised directly and immediately with the journal as well.

This section is also where you will disclose any potentially competing interests, and mention whether you’re willing to look at a revised version of the manuscript.

Do not use this space to critique the manuscript, since comments entered here will not be passed along to the authors.  If you’re not sure what should go in the confidential comments, read the reviewer instructions or check with the journal first before submitting your review. If you are reviewing for a journal that does not offer a space for confidential comments, consider writing to the editorial office directly with your concerns.

Get this outline in a template

Giving Feedback

Giving feedback is hard. Giving effective feedback can be even more challenging. Remember that your ultimate goal is to discuss what the authors would need to do in order to qualify for publication. The point is not to nitpick every piece of the manuscript. Your focus should be on providing constructive and critical feedback that the authors can use to improve their study.

If you’ve ever had your own work reviewed, you already know that it’s not always easy to receive feedback. Follow the golden rule: Write the type of review you’d want to receive if you were the author. Even if you decide not to identify yourself in the review, you should write comments that you would be comfortable signing your name to.

In your comments, use phrases like “ the authors’ discussion of X” instead of “ your discussion of X .” This will depersonalize the feedback and keep the focus on the manuscript instead of the authors.

General guidelines for effective feedback

research paper evaluation format

  • Justify your recommendation with concrete evidence and specific examples.
  • Be specific so the authors know what they need to do to improve.
  • Be thorough. This might be the only time you read the manuscript.
  • Be professional and respectful. The authors will be reading these comments too.
  • Remember to say what you liked about the manuscript!

research paper evaluation format

Don’t

  • Recommend additional experiments or  unnecessary elements that are out of scope for the study or for the journal criteria.
  • Tell the authors exactly how to revise their manuscript—you don’t need to do their work for them.
  • Use the review to promote your own research or hypotheses.
  • Focus on typos and grammar. If the manuscript needs significant editing for language and writing quality, just mention this in your comments.
  • Submit your review without proofreading it and checking everything one more time.

Before and After: Sample Reviewer Comments

Keeping in mind the guidelines above, how do you put your thoughts into words? Here are some sample “before” and “after” reviewer comments

✗ Before

“The authors appear to have no idea what they are talking about. I don’t think they have read any of the literature on this topic.”

✓ After

“The study fails to address how the findings relate to previous research in this area. The authors should rewrite their Introduction and Discussion to reference the related literature, especially recently published work such as Darwin et al.”

“The writing is so bad, it is practically unreadable. I could barely bring myself to finish it.”

“While the study appears to be sound, the language is unclear, making it difficult to follow. I advise the authors work with a writing coach or copyeditor to improve the flow and readability of the text.”

“It’s obvious that this type of experiment should have been included. I have no idea why the authors didn’t use it. This is a big mistake.”

“The authors are off to a good start, however, this study requires additional experiments, particularly [type of experiment]. Alternatively, the authors should include more information that clarifies and justifies their choice of methods.”

Suggested Language for Tricky Situations

You might find yourself in a situation where you’re not sure how to explain the problem or provide feedback in a constructive and respectful way. Here is some suggested language for common issues you might experience.

What you think : The manuscript is fatally flawed. What you could say: “The study does not appear to be sound” or “the authors have missed something crucial”.

What you think : You don’t completely understand the manuscript. What you could say : “The authors should clarify the following sections to avoid confusion…”

What you think : The technical details don’t make sense. What you could say : “The technical details should be expanded and clarified to ensure that readers understand exactly what the researchers studied.”

What you think: The writing is terrible. What you could say : “The authors should revise the language to improve readability.”

What you think : The authors have over-interpreted the findings. What you could say : “The authors aim to demonstrate [XYZ], however, the data does not fully support this conclusion. Specifically…”

What does a good review look like?

Check out the peer review examples at F1000 Research to see how other reviewers write up their reports and give constructive feedback to authors.

Time to Submit the Review!

Be sure you turn in your report on time. Need an extension? Tell the journal so that they know what to expect. If you need a lot of extra time, the journal might need to contact other reviewers or notify the author about the delay.

Tip: Building a relationship with an editor

You’ll be more likely to be asked to review again if you provide high-quality feedback and if you turn in the review on time. Especially if it’s your first review for a journal, it’s important to show that you are reliable. Prove yourself once and you’ll get asked to review again!

  • Getting started as a reviewer
  • Responding to an invitation
  • Reading a manuscript
  • Writing a peer review

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

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

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

U.S. flag

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
  • Perspect Clin Res
  • v.12(2); Apr-Jun 2021

Critical appraisal of published research papers – A reinforcing tool for research methodology: Questionnaire-based study

Snehalata gajbhiye.

Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Raakhi Tripathi

Urwashi parmar, nishtha khatri, anirudha potey.

1 Department of Clinical Trials, Serum Institute of India, Pune, Maharashtra, India

Background and Objectives:

Critical appraisal of published research papers is routinely conducted as a journal club (JC) activity in pharmacology departments of various medical colleges across Maharashtra, and it forms an important part of their postgraduate curriculum. The objective of this study was to evaluate the perception of pharmacology postgraduate students and teachers toward use of critical appraisal as a reinforcing tool for research methodology. Evaluation of performance of the in-house pharmacology postgraduate students in the critical appraisal activity constituted secondary objective of the study.

Materials and Methods:

The study was conducted in two parts. In Part I, a cross-sectional questionnaire-based evaluation on perception toward critical appraisal activity was carried out among pharmacology postgraduate students and teachers. In Part II of the study, JC score sheets of 2 nd - and 3 rd -year pharmacology students over the past 4 years were evaluated.

One hundred and twenty-seven postgraduate students and 32 teachers participated in Part I of the study. About 118 (92.9%) students and 28 (87.5%) faculties considered the critical appraisal activity to be beneficial for the students. JC score sheet assessments suggested that there was a statistically significant improvement in overall scores obtained by postgraduate students ( n = 25) in their last JC as compared to the first JC.

Conclusion:

Journal article criticism is a crucial tool to develop a research attitude among postgraduate students. Participation in the JC activity led to the improvement in the skill of critical appraisal of published research articles, but this improvement was not educationally relevant.

INTRODUCTION

Critical appraisal of a research paper is defined as “The process of carefully and systematically examining research to judge its trustworthiness, value and relevance in a particular context.”[ 1 ] Since scientific literature is rapidly expanding with more than 12,000 articles being added to the MEDLINE database per week,[ 2 ] critical appraisal is very important to distinguish scientifically useful and well-written articles from imprecise articles.

Educational authorities like the Medical Council of India (MCI) and Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS) have stated in pharmacology postgraduate curriculum that students must critically appraise research papers. To impart training toward these skills, MCI and MUHS have emphasized on the introduction of journal club (JC) activity for postgraduate (PG) students, wherein students review a published original research paper and state the merits and demerits of the paper. Abiding by this, pharmacology departments across various medical colleges in Maharashtra organize JC at frequent intervals[ 3 , 4 ] and students discuss varied aspects of the article with teaching faculty of the department.[ 5 ] Moreover, this activity carries a significant weightage of marks in the pharmacology university examination. As postgraduate students attend this activity throughout their 3-year tenure, it was perceived by the authors that this activity of critical appraisal of research papers could emerge as a tool for reinforcing the knowledge of research methodology. Hence, a questionnaire-based study was designed to find out the perceptions from PG students and teachers.

There have been studies that have laid emphasis on the procedure of conducting critical appraisal of research papers and its application into clinical practice.[ 6 , 7 ] However, there are no studies that have evaluated how well students are able to critically appraise a research paper. The Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics at Seth GS Medical College has developed an evaluation method to score the PG students on this skill and this tool has been implemented for the last 5 years. Since there are no research data available on the performance of PG Pharmacology students in JC, capturing the critical appraisal activity evaluation scores of in-house PG students was chosen as another objective of the study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Description of the journal club activity.

JC is conducted in the Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics at Seth GS Medical College once in every 2 weeks. During the JC activity, postgraduate students critically appraise published original research articles on their completeness and aptness in terms of the following: study title, rationale, objectives, study design, methodology-study population, inclusion/exclusion criteria, duration, intervention and safety/efficacy variables, randomization, blinding, statistical analysis, results, discussion, conclusion, references, and abstract. All postgraduate students attend this activity, while one of them critically appraises the article (who has received the research paper given by one of the faculty members 5 days before the day of JC). Other faculties also attend these sessions and facilitate the discussions. As the student comments on various sections of the paper, the same predecided faculty who gave the article (single assessor) evaluates the student on a total score of 100 which is split per section as follows: Introduction –20 marks, Methodology –20 marks, Discussion – 20 marks, Results and Conclusion –20 marks, References –10 marks, and Title, Abstract, and Keywords – 10 marks. However, there are no standard operating procedures to assess the performance of students at JC.

Methodology

After seeking permission from the Institutional Ethics Committee, the study was conducted in two parts. Part I consisted of a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey that was conducted from October 2016 to September 2017. A questionnaire to evaluate perception towards the activity of critical appraisal of published papers as research methodology reinforcing tool was developed by the study investigators. The questionnaire consisted of 20 questions: 14 questions [refer Figure 1 ] graded on a 3-point Likert scale (agree, neutral, and disagree), 1 multiple choice selection question, 2 dichotomous questions, 1 semi-open-ended questions, and 2 open-ended questions. Content validation for this questionnaire was carried out with the help of eight pharmacology teachers. The content validity ratio per item was calculated and each item in the questionnaire had a CVR ratio (CVR) of >0.75.[ 8 ] The perception questionnaire was either E-mailed or sent through WhatsApp to PG pharmacology students and teaching faculty in pharmacology departments at various medical colleges across Maharashtra. Informed consent was obtained on E-mail from all the participants.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is PCR-12-100-g001.jpg

Graphical representation of the percentage of students/teachers who agreed that critical appraisal of research helped them improve their knowledge on various aspects of research, perceived that faculty participation is important in this activity, and considered critical appraisal activity beneficial for students. The numbers adjacent to the bar diagrams indicate the raw number of students/faculty who agreed, while brackets indicate %

Part II of the study consisted of evaluating the performance of postgraduate students toward skills of critical appraisal of published papers. For this purpose, marks obtained by 2 nd - and 3 rd -year residents during JC sessions conducted over a period of 4 years from October 2013 to September 2017 were recorded and analyzed. No data on personal identifiers of the students were captured.

Statistical analysis

Marks obtained by postgraduate students in their first and last JC were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test, while marks obtained by 2 nd - and 3 rd -year postgraduate students were compared using Mann–Whitney test since the data were nonparametric. These statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism statistical software, San Diego, Calfornia, USA, Version 7.0d. Data obtained from the perception questionnaire were entered in Microsoft Excel sheet and were expressed as frequencies (percentages) using descriptive statistics.

Participants who answered all items of the questionnaire were considered as complete responders and only completed questionnaires were analyzed. The questionnaire was sent through an E-mail to 100 students and through WhatsApp to 68 students. Out of the 100 students who received the questionnaire through E-mail, 79 responded completely and 8 were incomplete responders, while 13 students did not revert back. Out of the 68 students who received the questionnaire through WhatsApp, 48 responded completely, 6 gave an incomplete response, and 14 students did not revert back. Hence, of the 168 postgraduate students who received the questionnaire, 127 responded completely (student response rate for analysis = 75.6%). The questionnaire was E-mailed to 33 faculties and was sent through WhatsApp to 25 faculties. Out of the 33 faculties who received the questionnaire through E-mail, 19 responded completely, 5 responded incompletely, and 9 did not respond at all. Out of the 25 faculties who received the questionnaire through WhatsApp, 13 responded completely, 3 were incomplete responders, and 9 did not respond at all. Hence, of a total of 58 faculties who were contacted, 32 responded completely (faculty response rate for analysis = 55%). For Part I of the study, responses on the perception questionnaire from 127 postgraduate students and 32 postgraduate teachers were recorded and analyzed. None of the faculty who participated in the validation of the questionnaire participated in the survey. Number of responses obtained region wise (Mumbai region and rest of Maharashtra region) have been depicted in Table 1 .

Region-wise distribution of responses

Number of responses obtained from students/faculty belonging to Mumbai colleges and rest of Maharashtra colleges. Brackets indicate percentages

As per the data obtained on the Likert scale questions, 102 (80.3%) students and 29 (90.6%) teachers agreed that critical appraisal trains the students in doing a review of literature before selecting a particular research topic. Majority of the participants, i.e., 104 (81.9%) students and 29 (90.6%) teachers also believed that the activity increases student's knowledge regarding various experimental evaluation techniques. Moreover, 112 (88.2%) students and 27 (84.4%) faculty considered that critical appraisal activity results in improved skills of writing and understanding methodology section of research articles in terms of inclusion/exclusion criteria, endpoints, and safety/efficacy variables. About 103 (81.1%) students and 24 (75%) teachers perceived that this activity results in refinement of the student's research work. About 118 (92.9%) students and 28 (87.5%) faculty considered the critical appraisal activity to be beneficial for the students. Responses to 14 individual Likert scale items of the questionnaire have been depicted in Figure 1 .

With respect to the multiple choice selection question, 66 (52%) students and 16 (50%) teachers opined that faculty should select the paper, 53 (41.7%) students and 9 (28.1%) teachers stated that the papers should be selected by the presenting student himself/herself, while 8 (6.3%) students and 7 (21.9%) teachers expressed that some other student should select the paper to be presented at the JC.

The responses to dichotomous questions were as follows: majority of the students, that is, 109 (85.8%) and 23 (71.9%) teachers perceived that a standard checklist for article review should be given to the students before critical appraisal of journal article. Open-ended questions of the questionnaire invited suggestions from the participants regarding ways of getting trained on critical appraisal skills and of improving JC activity. Some of the suggestions given by faculty were as follows: increasing the frequency of JC activity, discussion of cited articles and new guidelines related to it, selecting all types of articles for criticism rather than only randomized controlled trials, and regular yearly exams on article criticism. Students stated that regular and frequent article criticism activity, practice of writing letter to the editor after criticism, active participation by peers and faculty, increasing weightage of marks for critical appraisal of papers in university examinations (at present marks are 50 out of 400), and a formal training for research criticism from 1 st year of postgraduation could improve critical appraisal program.

In Part II of this study, performance of the students on the skill of critical appraisal of papers was evaluated. Complete data of the first and last JC scores of a total of 25 students of the department were available, and when these scores were compared, it was seen that there was a statistically significant improvement in the overall scores ( P = 0.04), as well as in the scores obtained in methodology ( P = 0.03) and results section ( P = 0.02). This is depicted in Table 2 . Although statistically significant, the differences in scores in the methodology section, results section, and overall scores were 1.28/20, 1.28/20, and 4.36/100, respectively, amounting to 5.4%, 5.4%, and 4.36% higher scores in the last JC, which may not be considered educationally relevant (practically significant). The quantum of difference that would be considered practically significant was not decided a priori .

Comparison of marks obtained by pharmacology residents in their first and last journal club

Marks have been represented as mean±SD. The maximum marks that can be obtained in each section have been stated as maximum. *Indicates statistically significant ( P <0.05). IQR=Interquartile range, SD=Standard deviation

Scores of two groups, one group consisting of 2 nd -year postgraduate students ( n = 44) and second group consisting of 3 rd -year postgraduate students ( n = 32) were compared and revealed no statistically significant difference in overall score ( P = 0.84). This is depicted in Table 3 . Since the quantum of difference in the overall scores was meager 0.84/100 (0.84%), it cannot be considered practically significant.

Comparison of marks obtained by 2 nd - and 3 rd -year pharmacology residents in the activity of critical appraisal of research articles

Marks have been represented as mean±SD. The maximum marks that can be obtained in each section have been stated as maximum. P <0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. IQR=Interquartile range, SD=Standard deviation

The present study gauged the perception of the pharmacology postgraduate students and teachers toward the use of critical appraisal activity as a reinforcing tool for research methodology. Both students and faculties (>50%) believed that critical appraisal activity increases student's knowledge on principles of ethics, experimental evaluation techniques, CONSORT guidelines, statistical analysis, concept of conflict of interest, current trends and recent advances in Pharmacology and trains on doing a review of literature, and improves skills on protocol writing and referencing. In the study conducted by Crank-Patton et al ., a survey on 278 general surgery program directors was carried out and more than 50% indicated that JC was important to their training program.[ 9 ]

The grading template used in Part II of the study was based on the IMRaD structure. Hence, equal weightage was given to the Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion sections and lesser weightage was given to the references and title, abstract, and keywords sections.[ 10 ] While evaluating the scores obtained by 25 students in their first and last JC, it was seen that there was a statistically significant improvement in the overall scores of the students in their last JC. However, the meager improvement in scores cannot be considered educationally relevant, as the authors expected the students to score >90% for the upgrade to be considered educationally impactful. The above findings suggest that even though participation in the JC activity led to a steady increase in student's performance (~4%), the increment was not as expected. In addition, the students did not portray an excellent performance (>90%), with average scores being around 72% even in the last JC. This can be probably explained by the fact that students perform this activity in a routine setting and not in an examination setting. Unlike the scenario in an examination, students were aware that even if they performed at a mediocre level, there would be no repercussions.

A separate comparison of scores obtained by 44 students in their 2 nd year and 32 students in their 3 rd year of postgraduation students was also done. The number of student evaluation sheets reviewed for this analysis was greater than the number of student evaluation sheets reviewed to compare first and last JC scores. This can be spelled out by the fact that many students were still in 2 nd year when this analysis was done and the score data for their last JC, which would take place in 3 rd year, was not available. In addition, few students were asked to present at JC multiple times during the 2 nd /3 rd year of their postgraduation.

While evaluating the critical appraisal scores obtained by 2 nd - and 3 rd -year postgraduate students, it was found that although the 3 rd -year students had a mean overall score greater than the 2 nd -year students, this difference was not statistically significant. During the 1 st year of MD Pharmacology course, students at the study center attend JC once in every 2 weeks. Even though the 1 st -year students do not themselves present in JC, they listen and observe the criticism points stated by senior peers presenting at the JC, and thereby, incur substantial amount of knowledge required to critically appraise papers. By the time, they become 2 nd -year students, they are already well versed with the program and this could have led to similar overall mean scores between the 2 nd -year students (71.50 ± 10.71) and 3 rd -year students (72.34 ± 10.85). This finding suggests that attentive listening is as important as active participation in the JC. Moreover, although students are well acquainted with the process of criticism when they are in their 3 rd year, there is certainly a scope for improvement in terms of the mean overall scores.

Similar results were obtained in a study conducted by Stern et al ., in which 62 students in the internal medicine program at the New England Medical Center were asked to respond to a questionnaire, evaluate a sample article, and complete a self-assessment of competence in evaluation of research. Twenty-eight residents returned the questionnaire and the composite score for the resident's objective assessment was not significantly correlated with the postgraduate year or self-assessed critical appraisal skill.[ 11 ]

Article criticism activity provides the students with practical experience of techniques taught in research methodology workshop. However, this should be supplemented with activities that assess the improvement of designing and presenting studies, such as protocol and paper writing. Thus, critical appraisal plays a significant role in reinforcing good research practices among the new generation of physicians. Moreover, critical appraisal is an integral part of PG assessment, and although the current format of conducting JCs did not portray a clinically meaningful improvement, the authors believe that it is important to continue this activity with certain modifications suggested by students who participated in this study. Students suggested that an increase in the frequency of critical appraisal activity accompanied by the display of active participation by peers and faculty could help in the betterment of this activity. This should be brought to attention of the faculty, as students seem to be interested to learn. Critical appraisal should be a two-way teaching–learning process between the students and faculty and not a dire need for satisfying the students' eligibility criteria for postgraduate university examinations. This activity is not only for the trainee doctors but also a part of the overall faculty development program.[ 12 ]

In the present era, JCs have been used as a tool to not only teach critical appraisal skills but also to teach other necessary aspects such as research design, medical statistics, clinical epidemiology, and clinical decision-making.[ 13 , 14 ] A study conducted by Khan in 2013 suggested that success of JC program can be ensured if institutes develop a defined JC objective for the development of learning capability of students and also if they cultivate more skilled faculties.[ 15 ] A good JC is believed to facilitate relevant, meaningful scientific discussion, and evaluation of the research updates that will eventually benefit the patient care.[ 12 ]

Although there is a lot of literature emphasizing the importance of JC, there is a lack of studies that have evaluated the outcome of such activity. One such study conducted by Ibrahim et al . assessed the importance of critical appraisal as an activity in surgical trainees in Nigeria. They reported that 92.42% trainees considered the activity to be important or very important and 48% trainees stated that the activity helped in improving literature search.[ 16 ]

This study is unique since it is the first of its kind to evaluate how well students are able to critically appraise a research paper. Moreover, the study has taken into consideration the due opinions of the students as well as faculties, unlike the previous literature which has laid emphasis on only student's perception. A limitation of this study is that sample size for faculties was smaller than the students, as it was not possible to convince the distant faculty in other cities to fill the survey. Besides, there may be a variation in the manner of conduct of the critical appraisal activity in pharmacology departments across the various medical colleges in the country. Another limitation of this study was that a single assessor graded a single student during one particular JC. Nevertheless, each student presented at multiple JC and thereby came across multiple assessors. Since the articles addressed at different JC were disparate, interobserver variability was not taken into account in this study. Furthermore, the authors did not make an a priori decision on the quantum of increase in scores that would be considered educationally meaningful.

Pharmacology students and teachers acknowledge the role of critical appraisal in improving the ability to understand the crucial concepts of research methodology and research conduct. In our institute, participation in the JC activity led to an improvement in the skill of critical appraisal of published research articles among the pharmacology postgraduate students. However, this improvement was not educationally relevant. The scores obtained by final-year postgraduate students in this activity were nearly 72% indicating that there is still scope of betterment in this skill.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the support rendered by the entire Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics at Seth GS Medical College.

Peer review templates, expert examples and free training courses

research paper evaluation format

Joanna Wilkinson

Learning how to write a constructive peer review is an essential step in helping to safeguard the quality and integrity of published literature. Read on for resources that will get you on the right track, including peer review templates, example reports and the Web of Science™ Academy: our free, online course that teaches you the core competencies of peer review through practical experience ( try it today ).

How to write a peer review

Understanding the principles, forms and functions of peer review will enable you to write solid, actionable review reports. It will form the basis for a comprehensive and well-structured review, and help you comment on the quality, rigor and significance of the research paper. It will also help you identify potential breaches of normal ethical practice.

This may sound daunting but it doesn’t need to be. There are plenty of peer review templates, resources and experts out there to help you, including:

Peer review training courses and in-person workshops

  • Peer review templates ( found in our Web of Science Academy )
  • Expert examples of peer review reports
  • Co-reviewing (sharing the task of peer reviewing with a senior researcher)

Other peer review resources, blogs, and guidelines

We’ll go through each one of these in turn below, but first: a quick word on why learning peer review is so important.

Why learn to peer review?

Peer reviewers and editors are gatekeepers of the research literature used to document and communicate human discovery. Reviewers, therefore, need a sound understanding of their role and obligations to ensure the integrity of this process. This also helps them maintain quality research, and to help protect the public from flawed and misleading research findings.

Learning to peer review is also an important step in improving your own professional development.

You’ll become a better writer and a more successful published author in learning to review. It gives you a critical vantage point and you’ll begin to understand what editors are looking for. It will also help you keep abreast of new research and best-practice methods in your field.

We strongly encourage you to learn the core concepts of peer review by joining a course or workshop. You can attend in-person workshops to learn from and network with experienced reviewers and editors. As an example, Sense about Science offers peer review workshops every year. To learn more about what might be in store at one of these, researcher Laura Chatland shares her experience at one of the workshops in London.

There are also plenty of free, online courses available, including courses in the Web of Science Academy such as ‘Reviewing in the Sciences’, ‘Reviewing in the Humanities’ and ‘An introduction to peer review’

The Web of Science Academy also supports co-reviewing with a mentor to teach peer review through practical experience. You learn by writing reviews of preprints, published papers, or even ‘real’ unpublished manuscripts with guidance from your mentor. You can work with one of our community mentors or your own PhD supervisor or postdoc advisor, or even a senior colleague in your department.

Go to the Web of Science Academy

Peer review templates

Peer review templates are helpful to use as you work your way through a manuscript. As part of our free Web of Science Academy courses, you’ll gain exclusive access to comprehensive guidelines and a peer review report. It offers points to consider for all aspects of the manuscript, including the abstract, methods and results sections. It also teaches you how to structure your review and will get you thinking about the overall strengths and impact of the paper at hand.

  • Web of Science Academy template (requires joining one of the free courses)
  • PLoS’s review template
  • Wiley’s peer review guide (not a template as such, but a thorough guide with questions to consider in the first and second reading of the manuscript)

Beyond following a template, it’s worth asking your editor or checking the journal’s peer review management system. That way, you’ll learn whether you need to follow a formal or specific peer review structure for that particular journal. If no such formal approach exists, try asking the editor for examples of other reviews performed for the journal. This will give you a solid understanding of what they expect from you.

Peer review examples

Understand what a constructive peer review looks like by learning from the experts.

Here’s a sample of pre and post-publication peer reviews displayed on Web of Science publication records to help guide you through your first few reviews. Some of these are transparent peer reviews , which means the entire process is open and visible — from initial review and response through to revision and final publication decision. You may wish to scroll to the bottom of these pages so you can first read the initial reviews, and make your way up the page to read the editor and author’s responses.

  • Pre-publication peer review: Patterns and mechanisms in instances of endosymbiont-induced parthenogenesis
  • Pre-publication peer review: Can Ciprofloxacin be Used for Precision Treatment of Gonorrhea in Public STD Clinics? Assessment of Ciprofloxacin Susceptibility and an Opportunity for Point-of-Care Testing
  • Transparent peer review: Towards a standard model of musical improvisation
  • Transparent peer review: Complex mosaic of sexual dichromatism and monochromatism in Pacific robins results from both gains and losses of elaborate coloration
  • Post-publication peer review: Brain state monitoring for the future prediction of migraine attacks
  • Web of Science Academy peer review: Students’ Perception on Training in Writing Research Article for Publication

F1000 has also put together a nice list of expert reviewer comments pertaining to the various aspects of a review report.

Co-reviewing

Co-reviewing (sharing peer review assignments with senior researchers) is one of the best ways to learn peer review. It gives researchers a hands-on, practical understanding of the process.

In an article in The Scientist , the team at Future of Research argues that co-reviewing can be a valuable learning experience for peer review, as long as it’s done properly and with transparency. The reason there’s a need to call out how co-reviewing works is because it does have its downsides. The practice can leave early-career researchers unaware of the core concepts of peer review. This can make it hard to later join an editor’s reviewer pool if they haven’t received adequate recognition for their share of the review work. (If you are asked to write a peer review on behalf of a senior colleague or researcher, get recognition for your efforts by asking your senior colleague to verify the collaborative co-review on your Web of Science researcher profiles).

The Web of Science Academy course ‘Co-reviewing with a mentor’ is uniquely practical in this sense. You will gain experience in peer review by practicing on real papers and working with a mentor to get feedback on how their peer review can be improved. Students submit their peer review report as their course assignment and after internal evaluation receive a course certificate, an Academy graduate badge on their Web of Science researcher profile and is put in front of top editors in their field through the Reviewer Locator at Clarivate.

Here are some external peer review resources found around the web:

  • Peer Review Resources from Sense about Science
  • Peer Review: The Nuts and Bolts by Sense about Science
  • How to review journal manuscripts by R. M. Rosenfeld for Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery
  • Ethical guidelines for peer review from COPE
  • An Instructional Guide for Peer Reviewers of Biomedical Manuscripts by Callaham, Schriger & Cooper for Annals of Emergency Medicine (requires Flash or Adobe)
  • EQUATOR Network’s reporting guidelines for health researchers

And finally, we’ve written a number of blogs about handy peer review tips. Check out some of our top picks:

  • How to Write a Peer Review: 12 things you need to know
  • Want To Peer Review? Top 10 Tips To Get Noticed By Editors
  • Review a manuscript like a pro: 6 tips from a Web of Science Academy supervisor
  • How to write a structured reviewer report: 5 tips from an early-career researcher

Want to learn more? Become a master of peer review and connect with top journal editors. The Web of Science Academy – your free online hub of courses designed by expert reviewers, editors and Nobel Prize winners. Find out more today.

Related posts

Demonstrating socioeconomic impact – a historical perspective of ancient wisdom and modern challenges.

research paper evaluation format

Unlocking U.K. research excellence: Key insights from the Research Professional News Live summit

research paper evaluation format

For better insights, assess research performance at the department level

research paper evaluation format

Page Content

Overview of the review report format, the first read-through, first read considerations, spotting potential major flaws, concluding the first reading, rejection after the first reading, before starting the second read-through, doing the second read-through, the second read-through: section by section guidance, how to structure your report, on presentation and style, criticisms & confidential comments to editors, the recommendation, when recommending rejection, additional resources, step by step guide to reviewing a manuscript.

When you receive an invitation to peer review, you should be sent a copy of the paper's abstract to help you decide whether you wish to do the review. Try to respond to invitations promptly - it will prevent delays. It is also important at this stage to declare any potential Conflict of Interest.

The structure of the review report varies between journals. Some follow an informal structure, while others have a more formal approach.

" Number your comments!!! " (Jonathon Halbesleben, former Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Informal Structure

Many journals don't provide criteria for reviews beyond asking for your 'analysis of merits'. In this case, you may wish to familiarize yourself with examples of other reviews done for the journal, which the editor should be able to provide or, as you gain experience, rely on your own evolving style.

Formal Structure

Other journals require a more formal approach. Sometimes they will ask you to address specific questions in your review via a questionnaire. Or they might want you to rate the manuscript on various attributes using a scorecard. Often you can't see these until you log in to submit your review. So when you agree to the work, it's worth checking for any journal-specific guidelines and requirements. If there are formal guidelines, let them direct the structure of your review.

In Both Cases

Whether specifically required by the reporting format or not, you should expect to compile comments to authors and possibly confidential ones to editors only.

Reviewing with Empathy

Following the invitation to review, when you'll have received the article abstract, you should already understand the aims, key data and conclusions of the manuscript. If you don't, make a note now that you need to feedback on how to improve those sections.

The first read-through is a skim-read. It will help you form an initial impression of the paper and get a sense of whether your eventual recommendation will be to accept or reject the paper.

Keep a pen and paper handy when skim-reading.

Try to bear in mind the following questions - they'll help you form your overall impression:

  • What is the main question addressed by the research? Is it relevant and interesting?
  • How original is the topic? What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
  • Is the paper well written? Is the text clear and easy to read?
  • Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented? Do they address the main question posed?
  • If the author is disagreeing significantly with the current academic consensus, do they have a substantial case? If not, what would be required to make their case credible?
  • If the paper includes tables or figures, what do they add to the paper? Do they aid understanding or are they superfluous?

While you should read the whole paper, making the right choice of what to read first can save time by flagging major problems early on.

Editors say, " Specific recommendations for remedying flaws are VERY welcome ."

Examples of possibly major flaws include:

  • Drawing a conclusion that is contradicted by the author's own statistical or qualitative evidence
  • The use of a discredited method
  • Ignoring a process that is known to have a strong influence on the area under study

If experimental design features prominently in the paper, first check that the methodology is sound - if not, this is likely to be a major flaw.

You might examine:

  • The sampling in analytical papers
  • The sufficient use of control experiments
  • The precision of process data
  • The regularity of sampling in time-dependent studies
  • The validity of questions, the use of a detailed methodology and the data analysis being done systematically (in qualitative research)
  • That qualitative research extends beyond the author's opinions, with sufficient descriptive elements and appropriate quotes from interviews or focus groups

Major Flaws in Information

If methodology is less of an issue, it's often a good idea to look at the data tables, figures or images first. Especially in science research, it's all about the information gathered. If there are critical flaws in this, it's very likely the manuscript will need to be rejected. Such issues include:

  • Insufficient data
  • Unclear data tables
  • Contradictory data that either are not self-consistent or disagree with the conclusions
  • Confirmatory data that adds little, if anything, to current understanding - unless strong arguments for such repetition are made

If you find a major problem, note your reasoning and clear supporting evidence (including citations).

After the initial read and using your notes, including those of any major flaws you found, draft the first two paragraphs of your review - the first summarizing the research question addressed and the second the contribution of the work. If the journal has a prescribed reporting format, this draft will still help you compose your thoughts.

The First Paragraph

This should state the main question addressed by the research and summarize the goals, approaches, and conclusions of the paper. It should:

  • Help the editor properly contextualize the research and add weight to your judgement
  • Show the author what key messages are conveyed to the reader, so they can be sure they are achieving what they set out to do
  • Focus on successful aspects of the paper so the author gets a sense of what they've done well

The Second Paragraph

This should provide a conceptual overview of the contribution of the research. So consider:

  • Is the paper's premise interesting and important?
  • Are the methods used appropriate?
  • Do the data support the conclusions?

After drafting these two paragraphs, you should be in a position to decide whether this manuscript is seriously flawed and should be rejected (see the next section). Or whether it is publishable in principle and merits a detailed, careful read through.

Even if you are coming to the opinion that an article has serious flaws, make sure you read the whole paper. This is very important because you may find some really positive aspects that can be communicated to the author. This could help them with future submissions.

A full read-through will also make sure that any initial concerns are indeed correct and fair. After all, you need the context of the whole paper before deciding to reject. If you still intend to recommend rejection, see the section "When recommending rejection."

Once the paper has passed your first read and you've decided the article is publishable in principle, one purpose of the second, detailed read-through is to help prepare the manuscript for publication. You may still decide to recommend rejection following a second reading.

" Offer clear suggestions for how the authors can address the concerns raised. In other words, if you're going to raise a problem, provide a solution ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Preparation

To save time and simplify the review:

  • Don't rely solely upon inserting comments on the manuscript document - make separate notes
  • Try to group similar concerns or praise together
  • If using a review program to note directly onto the manuscript, still try grouping the concerns and praise in separate notes - it helps later
  • Note line numbers of text upon which your notes are based - this helps you find items again and also aids those reading your review

Now that you have completed your preparations, you're ready to spend an hour or so reading carefully through the manuscript.

As you're reading through the manuscript for a second time, you'll need to keep in mind the argument's construction, the clarity of the language and content.

With regard to the argument’s construction, you should identify:

  • Any places where the meaning is unclear or ambiguous
  • Any factual errors
  • Any invalid arguments

You may also wish to consider:

  • Does the title properly reflect the subject of the paper?
  • Does the abstract provide an accessible summary of the paper?
  • Do the keywords accurately reflect the content?
  • Is the paper an appropriate length?
  • Are the key messages short, accurate and clear?

Not every submission is well written. Part of your role is to make sure that the text’s meaning is clear.

Editors say, " If a manuscript has many English language and editing issues, please do not try and fix it. If it is too bad, note that in your review and it should be up to the authors to have the manuscript edited ."

If the article is difficult to understand, you should have rejected it already. However, if the language is poor but you understand the core message, see if you can suggest improvements to fix the problem:

  • Are there certain aspects that could be communicated better, such as parts of the discussion?
  • Should the authors consider resubmitting to the same journal after language improvements?
  • Would you consider looking at the paper again once these issues are dealt with?

On Grammar and Punctuation

Your primary role is judging the research content. Don't spend time polishing grammar or spelling. Editors will make sure that the text is at a high standard before publication. However, if you spot grammatical errors that affect clarity of meaning, then it's important to highlight these. Expect to suggest such amendments - it's rare for a manuscript to pass review with no corrections.

A 2010 study of nursing journals found that 79% of recommendations by reviewers were influenced by grammar and writing style (Shattel, et al., 2010).

1. The Introduction

A well-written introduction:

  • Sets out the argument
  • Summarizes recent research related to the topic
  • Highlights gaps in current understanding or conflicts in current knowledge
  • Establishes the originality of the research aims by demonstrating the need for investigations in the topic area
  • Gives a clear idea of the target readership, why the research was carried out and the novelty and topicality of the manuscript

Originality and Topicality

Originality and topicality can only be established in the light of recent authoritative research. For example, it's impossible to argue that there is a conflict in current understanding by referencing articles that are 10 years old.

Authors may make the case that a topic hasn't been investigated in several years and that new research is required. This point is only valid if researchers can point to recent developments in data gathering techniques or to research in indirectly related fields that suggest the topic needs revisiting. Clearly, authors can only do this by referencing recent literature. Obviously, where older research is seminal or where aspects of the methodology rely upon it, then it is perfectly appropriate for authors to cite some older papers.

Editors say, "Is the report providing new information; is it novel or just confirmatory of well-known outcomes ?"

It's common for the introduction to end by stating the research aims. By this point you should already have a good impression of them - if the explicit aims come as a surprise, then the introduction needs improvement.

2. Materials and Methods

Academic research should be replicable, repeatable and robust - and follow best practice.

Replicable Research

This makes sufficient use of:

  • Control experiments
  • Repeated analyses
  • Repeated experiments

These are used to make sure observed trends are not due to chance and that the same experiment could be repeated by other researchers - and result in the same outcome. Statistical analyses will not be sound if methods are not replicable. Where research is not replicable, the paper should be recommended for rejection.

Repeatable Methods

These give enough detail so that other researchers are able to carry out the same research. For example, equipment used or sampling methods should all be described in detail so that others could follow the same steps. Where methods are not detailed enough, it's usual to ask for the methods section to be revised.

Robust Research

This has enough data points to make sure the data are reliable. If there are insufficient data, it might be appropriate to recommend revision. You should also consider whether there is any in-built bias not nullified by the control experiments.

Best Practice

During these checks you should keep in mind best practice:

  • Standard guidelines were followed (e.g. the CONSORT Statement for reporting randomized trials)
  • The health and safety of all participants in the study was not compromised
  • Ethical standards were maintained

If the research fails to reach relevant best practice standards, it's usual to recommend rejection. What's more, you don't then need to read any further.

3. Results and Discussion

This section should tell a coherent story - What happened? What was discovered or confirmed?

Certain patterns of good reporting need to be followed by the author:

  • They should start by describing in simple terms what the data show
  • They should make reference to statistical analyses, such as significance or goodness of fit
  • Once described, they should evaluate the trends observed and explain the significance of the results to wider understanding. This can only be done by referencing published research
  • The outcome should be a critical analysis of the data collected

Discussion should always, at some point, gather all the information together into a single whole. Authors should describe and discuss the overall story formed. If there are gaps or inconsistencies in the story, they should address these and suggest ways future research might confirm the findings or take the research forward.

4. Conclusions

This section is usually no more than a few paragraphs and may be presented as part of the results and discussion, or in a separate section. The conclusions should reflect upon the aims - whether they were achieved or not - and, just like the aims, should not be surprising. If the conclusions are not evidence-based, it's appropriate to ask for them to be re-written.

5. Information Gathered: Images, Graphs and Data Tables

If you find yourself looking at a piece of information from which you cannot discern a story, then you should ask for improvements in presentation. This could be an issue with titles, labels, statistical notation or image quality.

Where information is clear, you should check that:

  • The results seem plausible, in case there is an error in data gathering
  • The trends you can see support the paper's discussion and conclusions
  • There are sufficient data. For example, in studies carried out over time are there sufficient data points to support the trends described by the author?

You should also check whether images have been edited or manipulated to emphasize the story they tell. This may be appropriate but only if authors report on how the image has been edited (e.g. by highlighting certain parts of an image). Where you feel that an image has been edited or manipulated without explanation, you should highlight this in a confidential comment to the editor in your report.

6. List of References

You will need to check referencing for accuracy, adequacy and balance.

Where a cited article is central to the author's argument, you should check the accuracy and format of the reference - and bear in mind different subject areas may use citations differently. Otherwise, it's the editor’s role to exhaustively check the reference section for accuracy and format.

You should consider if the referencing is adequate:

  • Are important parts of the argument poorly supported?
  • Are there published studies that show similar or dissimilar trends that should be discussed?
  • If a manuscript only uses half the citations typical in its field, this may be an indicator that referencing should be improved - but don't be guided solely by quantity
  • References should be relevant, recent and readily retrievable

Check for a well-balanced list of references that is:

  • Helpful to the reader
  • Fair to competing authors
  • Not over-reliant on self-citation
  • Gives due recognition to the initial discoveries and related work that led to the work under assessment

You should be able to evaluate whether the article meets the criteria for balanced referencing without looking up every reference.

7. Plagiarism

By now you will have a deep understanding of the paper's content - and you may have some concerns about plagiarism.

Identified Concern

If you find - or already knew of - a very similar paper, this may be because the author overlooked it in their own literature search. Or it may be because it is very recent or published in a journal slightly outside their usual field.

You may feel you can advise the author how to emphasize the novel aspects of their own study, so as to better differentiate it from similar research. If so, you may ask the author to discuss their aims and results, or modify their conclusions, in light of the similar article. Of course, the research similarities may be so great that they render the work unoriginal and you have no choice but to recommend rejection.

"It's very helpful when a reviewer can point out recent similar publications on the same topic by other groups, or that the authors have already published some data elsewhere ." (Editor feedback)

Suspected Concern

If you suspect plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, but cannot recall or locate exactly what is being plagiarized, notify the editor of your suspicion and ask for guidance.

Most editors have access to software that can check for plagiarism.

Editors are not out to police every paper, but when plagiarism is discovered during peer review it can be properly addressed ahead of publication. If plagiarism is discovered only after publication, the consequences are worse for both authors and readers, because a retraction may be necessary.

For detailed guidelines see COPE's Ethical guidelines for reviewers and Wiley's Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics .

8. Search Engine Optimization (SEO)

After the detailed read-through, you will be in a position to advise whether the title, abstract and key words are optimized for search purposes. In order to be effective, good SEO terms will reflect the aims of the research.

A clear title and abstract will improve the paper's search engine rankings and will influence whether the user finds and then decides to navigate to the main article. The title should contain the relevant SEO terms early on. This has a major effect on the impact of a paper, since it helps it appear in search results. A poor abstract can then lose the reader's interest and undo the benefit of an effective title - whilst the paper's abstract may appear in search results, the potential reader may go no further.

So ask yourself, while the abstract may have seemed adequate during earlier checks, does it:

  • Do justice to the manuscript in this context?
  • Highlight important findings sufficiently?
  • Present the most interesting data?

Editors say, " Does the Abstract highlight the important findings of the study ?"

If there is a formal report format, remember to follow it. This will often comprise a range of questions followed by comment sections. Try to answer all the questions. They are there because the editor felt that they are important. If you're following an informal report format you could structure your report in three sections: summary, major issues, minor issues.

  • Give positive feedback first. Authors are more likely to read your review if you do so. But don't overdo it if you will be recommending rejection
  • Briefly summarize what the paper is about and what the findings are
  • Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing literature and current knowledge
  • Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly confirmatory
  • Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness
  • State any major flaws or weaknesses and note any special considerations. For example, if previously held theories are being overlooked

Major Issues

  • Are there any major flaws? State what they are and what the severity of their impact is on the paper
  • Has similar work already been published without the authors acknowledging this?
  • Are the authors presenting findings that challenge current thinking? Is the evidence they present strong enough to prove their case? Have they cited all the relevant work that would contradict their thinking and addressed it appropriately?
  • If major revisions are required, try to indicate clearly what they are
  • Are there any major presentational problems? Are figures & tables, language and manuscript structure all clear enough for you to accurately assess the work?
  • Are there any ethical issues? If you are unsure it may be better to disclose these in the confidential comments section

Minor Issues

  • Are there places where meaning is ambiguous? How can this be corrected?
  • Are the correct references cited? If not, which should be cited instead/also? Are citations excessive, limited, or biased?
  • Are there any factual, numerical or unit errors? If so, what are they?
  • Are all tables and figures appropriate, sufficient, and correctly labelled? If not, say which are not

Your review should ultimately help the author improve their article. So be polite, honest and clear. You should also try to be objective and constructive, not subjective and destructive.

You should also:

  • Write clearly and so you can be understood by people whose first language is not English
  • Avoid complex or unusual words, especially ones that would even confuse native speakers
  • Number your points and refer to page and line numbers in the manuscript when making specific comments
  • If you have been asked to only comment on specific parts or aspects of the manuscript, you should indicate clearly which these are
  • Treat the author's work the way you would like your own to be treated

Most journals give reviewers the option to provide some confidential comments to editors. Often this is where editors will want reviewers to state their recommendation - see the next section - but otherwise this area is best reserved for communicating malpractice such as suspected plagiarism, fraud, unattributed work, unethical procedures, duplicate publication, bias or other conflicts of interest.

However, this doesn't give reviewers permission to 'backstab' the author. Authors can't see this feedback and are unable to give their side of the story unless the editor asks them to. So in the spirit of fairness, write comments to editors as though authors might read them too.

Reviewers should check the preferences of individual journals as to where they want review decisions to be stated. In particular, bear in mind that some journals will not want the recommendation included in any comments to authors, as this can cause editors difficulty later - see Section 11 for more advice about working with editors.

You will normally be asked to indicate your recommendation (e.g. accept, reject, revise and resubmit, etc.) from a fixed-choice list and then to enter your comments into a separate text box.

Recommending Acceptance

If you're recommending acceptance, give details outlining why, and if there are any areas that could be improved. Don't just give a short, cursory remark such as 'great, accept'. See Improving the Manuscript

Recommending Revision

Where improvements are needed, a recommendation for major or minor revision is typical. You may also choose to state whether you opt in or out of the post-revision review too. If recommending revision, state specific changes you feel need to be made. The author can then reply to each point in turn.

Some journals offer the option to recommend rejection with the possibility of resubmission – this is most relevant where substantial, major revision is necessary.

What can reviewers do to help? " Be clear in their comments to the author (or editor) which points are absolutely critical if the paper is given an opportunity for revisio n." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Recommending Rejection

If recommending rejection or major revision, state this clearly in your review (and see the next section, 'When recommending rejection').

Where manuscripts have serious flaws you should not spend any time polishing the review you've drafted or give detailed advice on presentation.

Editors say, " If a reviewer suggests a rejection, but her/his comments are not detailed or helpful, it does not help the editor in making a decision ."

In your recommendations for the author, you should:

  • Give constructive feedback describing ways that they could improve the research
  • Keep the focus on the research and not the author. This is an extremely important part of your job as a reviewer
  • Avoid making critical confidential comments to the editor while being polite and encouraging to the author - the latter may not understand why their manuscript has been rejected. Also, they won't get feedback on how to improve their research and it could trigger an appeal

Remember to give constructive criticism even if recommending rejection. This helps developing researchers improve their work and explains to the editor why you felt the manuscript should not be published.

" When the comments seem really positive, but the recommendation is rejection…it puts the editor in a tough position of having to reject a paper when the comments make it sound like a great paper ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Visit our Wiley Author Learning and Training Channel for expert advice on peer review.

Watch the video, Ethical considerations of Peer Review

Home / Guides / Writing Guides / Paper Types / How to Write a Research Paper

How to Write a Research Paper

Research papers are a requirement for most college courses, so knowing how to write a research paper is important. These in-depth pieces of academic writing can seem pretty daunting, but there’s no need to panic. When broken down into its key components, writing your paper should be a manageable and, dare we say it, enjoyable task.

We’re going to look at the required elements of a paper in detail, and you might also find this webpage to be a  useful reference .

Guide Overview

  • What is a research paper?
  • How to start a research paper
  • Get clear instructions
  • Brainstorm ideas
  • Choose a topic
  • Outline your outline
  • Make friends with your librarian
  • Find quality sources
  • Understand your topic
  • A detailed outline
  • Keep it factual
  • Finalize your thesis statement
  • Think about format
  • Cite, cite and cite
  • The editing process
  • Final checks

What is a Research Paper?

A research paper is more than just an extra long essay or encyclopedic regurgitation of facts and figures. The aim of this task is to combine in-depth study of a particular topic with critical thinking and evaluation by the student—that’s you!

There are two main types of research paper: argumentative and analytical.

Argumentative  — takes a stance on a particular topic right from the start, with the aim of persuading the reader of the validity of the argument. These are best suited to topics that are debatable or controversial.

Analytical  — takes no firm stance on a topic initially. Instead it asks a question and should come to an answer through the evaluation of source material. As its name suggests, the aim is to analyze the source material and offer a fresh perspective on the results.

If you wish to further your understanding, you can  learn more here .

A required word count (think thousands!) can make writing that paper seem like an insurmountable task. Don’t worry! Our step-by-step guide will help you write that killer paper with confidence.

How to Start a Research Paper

Don’t rush ahead. Taking care during the planning and preparation stage will save time and hassle later.

Get Clear Instructions

Your lecturer or professor is your biggest ally—after all, they want you to do well. Make sure you get clear guidance from them on both the required format and preferred topics. In some cases, your tutor will assign a topic, or give you a set list to choose from. Often, however, you’ll be expected to select a suitable topic for yourself.

Having a research paper example to look at can also be useful for first-timers, so ask your tutor to supply you with one.

Brainstorm Ideas

Brainstorming research paper ideas is the first step to selecting a topic—and there are various methods you can use to brainstorm, including clustering (also known as mind mapping). Think about the research paper topics that interest you, and identify topics you have a strong opinion on.

Choose a Topic

Once you have a list of potential research paper topics, narrow them down by considering your academic strengths and ‘gaps in the market,’ e.g., don’t choose a common topic that’s been written about many times before. While you want your topic to be fresh and interesting, you also need to ensure there’s enough material available for you to work with. Similarly, while you shouldn’t go for easy research paper topics just for the sake of giving yourself less work, you do need to choose a topic that you feel confident you can do justice to.

Outline Your Outline

It might not be possible to form a full research paper outline until you’ve done some information gathering, but you can think about your overall aim; basically what you want to show and how you’re going to show it. Now’s also a good time to consider your thesis statement, although this might change as you delve into your source material deeper.

Researching the Research

Now it’s time to knuckle down and dig out all the information that’s relevant to your topic. Here are some tips.

Make Friends With Your Librarian

While lots of information gathering can be carried out online from anywhere, there’s still a place for old-fashioned study sessions in the library. A good librarian can help you to locate sources quickly and easily, and might even make suggestions that you hadn’t thought of. They’re great at helping you study and research, but probably can’t save you the best desk by the window.

Find Quality Sources

Not all sources are created equal, so make sure that you’re referring to reputable, reliable information. Examples of sources could include books, magazine articles, scholarly articles, reputable websites, databases and journals. Keywords relating to your topic can help you in your search.

As you search, you should begin to compile a list of references. This will make it much easier later when you are ready to build your paper’s bibliography. Keeping clear notes detailing any sources that you use will help you to avoid accidentally plagiarizing someone else’s work or ideas.

Understand Your Topic

Simply regurgitating facts and figures won’t make for an interesting paper. It’s essential that you fully understand your topic so you can come across as an authority on the subject and present your own ideas on it. You should read around your topic as widely as you can, before narrowing your area of interest for your paper, and critically analyzing your findings.

A Detailed Outline

Once you’ve got a firm grip on your subject and the source material available to you, formulate a detailed outline, including your thesis statement and how you are going to support it. The structure of your paper will depend on the subject type—ask a tutor for a research paper outline example if you’re unsure.

Get Writing!

If you’ve fully understood your topic and gathered quality source materials, bringing it all together should actually be the easy part!

Keep it Factual

There’s no place for sloppy writing in this kind of academic task, so keep your language simple and clear, and your points critical and succinct. The creative part is finding innovative angles and new insights on the topic to make your paper interesting.

Don’t forget about our  verb ,  preposition , and  adverb  pages. You may find useful information to help with your writing!

Finalize Your Thesis Statement

You should now be in a position to finalize your thesis statement, showing clearly what your paper will show, answer or prove. This should usually be a one or two sentence statement; however, it’s the core idea of your paper, and every insight that you include should be relevant to it. Remember, a thesis statement is not merely a summary of your findings. It should present an argument or perspective that the rest of your paper aims to support.

Think About Format

The required style of your research paper format will usually depend on your subject area. For example,  APA format  is normally used for social science subjects, while MLA style is most commonly used for liberal arts and humanities. Still, there are thousands of  more styles . Your tutor should be able to give you clear guidance on how to format your paper, how to structure it, and what elements it should include. Make sure that you follow their instruction. If possible, ask to see a sample research paper in the required format.

Cite, Cite and Cite

As all research paper topics invariably involve referring to other people’s work, it’s vital that you know how to properly cite your sources to avoid unintentional plagiarism. Whether you’re paraphrasing (putting someone else’s ideas into your own words) or directly quoting, the original source needs to be referenced. What style of citation formatting you use will depend on the requirements of your instructor, with common styles including APA and  MLA format , which consist of in-text citations (short citations within the text, enclosed with parentheses) and a reference/works cited list.

The Editing Process

It’s likely that your paper will go through several drafts before you arrive at the very best version. The editing process is your chance to fix any weak points in your paper before submission. You might find that it needs a better balance of both primary and secondary sources (click through to find  more info  on the difference), that an  adjective  could use tweaking, or that you’ve included sources that aren’t relevant or credible. You might even feel that you need to be clearer in your argument, more thorough in your critical analysis, or more balanced in your evaluation.

From a stylistic point of view, you want to ensure that your writing is clear, simple and concise, with no long, rambling sentences or paragraphs. Keeping within the required word count parameters is also important, and another thing to keep in mind is the inclusion of gender-neutral language, to avoid the reinforcement of tired stereotypes.

Don’t forget about our other pages! If you are looking for help with other grammar-related topics, check out our  noun ,  pronoun , and  conjunction  pages.

Final Checks

Once you’re happy with the depth and balance of the arguments and points presented, you can turn your attention to the finer details, such as formatting, spelling, punctuation, grammar and ensuring that your citations are all present and correct. The EasyBib Plus  plagiarism checker  is a handy tool for making sure that your sources are all cited. An EasyBib Plus subscription also comes with access to citation tools that can help you create citations in your choice of format.

Also, double-check your deadline date and the submissions guidelines to avoid any last-minute issues. Take a peek at our other grammar pages while you’re at it. We’ve included numerous links on this page, but we also have an  interjection  page and  determiner  page.

So you’ve done your final checks and handed in your paper according to the submissions guidelines and preferably before deadline day. Congratulations! If your schedule permits, now would be a great time to take a break from your studies. Maybe plan a fun activity with friends or just take the opportunity to rest and relax. A well-earned break from the books will ensure that you return to class refreshed and ready for your next stage of learning—and the next  research paper  requirement your tutor sets!

EasyBib Writing Resources

Writing a paper.

  • Academic Essay
  • Argumentative Essay
  • College Admissions Essay
  • Expository Essay
  • Persuasive Essay
  • Research Paper
  • Thesis Statement
  • Writing a Conclusion
  • Writing an Introduction
  • Writing an Outline
  • Writing a Summary

EasyBib Plus Features

  • Citation Generator
  • Essay Checker
  • Expert Check Proofreader
  • Grammar Checker
  • Paraphrasing Tools

Plagiarism Checker

  • Spell Checker

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?

Grammar and Plagiarism Checkers

Grammar Basics

Plagiarism Basics

Writing Basics

Upload a paper to check for plagiarism against billions of sources and get advanced writing suggestions for clarity and style.

Get Started

  • Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Research Method

Home » Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and Templates

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and Templates

Table of Contents

Research Paper Formats

Research paper format is an essential aspect of academic writing that plays a crucial role in the communication of research findings . The format of a research paper depends on various factors such as the discipline, style guide, and purpose of the research. It includes guidelines for the structure, citation style, referencing , and other elements of the paper that contribute to its overall presentation and coherence. Adhering to the appropriate research paper format is vital for ensuring that the research is accurately and effectively communicated to the intended audience. In this era of information, it is essential to understand the different research paper formats and their guidelines to communicate research effectively, accurately, and with the required level of detail. This post aims to provide an overview of some of the common research paper formats used in academic writing.

Research Paper Formats

Research Paper Formats are as follows:

  • APA (American Psychological Association) format
  • MLA (Modern Language Association) format
  • Chicago/Turabian style
  • IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) format
  • AMA (American Medical Association) style
  • Harvard style
  • Vancouver style
  • ACS (American Chemical Society) style
  • ASA (American Sociological Association) style
  • APSA (American Political Science Association) style

APA (American Psychological Association) Format

Here is a general APA format for a research paper:

  • Title Page: The title page should include the title of your paper, your name, and your institutional affiliation. It should also include a running head, which is a shortened version of the title, and a page number in the upper right-hand corner.
  • Abstract : The abstract is a brief summary of your paper, typically 150-250 words. It should include the purpose of your research, the main findings, and any implications or conclusions that can be drawn.
  • Introduction: The introduction should provide background information on your topic, state the purpose of your research, and present your research question or hypothesis. It should also include a brief literature review that discusses previous research on your topic.
  • Methods: The methods section should describe the procedures you used to collect and analyze your data. It should include information on the participants, the materials and instruments used, and the statistical analyses performed.
  • Results: The results section should present the findings of your research in a clear and concise manner. Use tables and figures to help illustrate your results.
  • Discussion : The discussion section should interpret your results and relate them back to your research question or hypothesis. It should also discuss the implications of your findings and any limitations of your study.
  • References : The references section should include a list of all sources cited in your paper. Follow APA formatting guidelines for your citations and references.

Some additional tips for formatting your APA research paper:

  • Use 12-point Times New Roman font throughout the paper.
  • Double-space all text, including the references.
  • Use 1-inch margins on all sides of the page.
  • Indent the first line of each paragraph by 0.5 inches.
  • Use a hanging indent for the references (the first line should be flush with the left margin, and all subsequent lines should be indented).
  • Number all pages, including the title page and references page, in the upper right-hand corner.

APA Research Paper Format Template

APA Research Paper Format Template is as follows:

Title Page:

  • Title of the paper
  • Author’s name
  • Institutional affiliation
  • A brief summary of the main points of the paper, including the research question, methods, findings, and conclusions. The abstract should be no more than 250 words.

Introduction:

  • Background information on the topic of the research paper
  • Research question or hypothesis
  • Significance of the study
  • Overview of the research methods and design
  • Brief summary of the main findings
  • Participants: description of the sample population, including the number of participants and their characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity, etc.)
  • Materials: description of any materials used in the study (e.g., survey questions, experimental apparatus)
  • Procedure: detailed description of the steps taken to conduct the study
  • Presentation of the findings of the study, including statistical analyses if applicable
  • Tables and figures may be included to illustrate the results

Discussion:

  • Interpretation of the results in light of the research question and hypothesis
  • Implications of the study for the field
  • Limitations of the study
  • Suggestions for future research

References:

  • A list of all sources cited in the paper, in APA format

Formatting guidelines:

  • Double-spaced
  • 12-point font (Times New Roman or Arial)
  • 1-inch margins on all sides
  • Page numbers in the top right corner
  • Headings and subheadings should be used to organize the paper
  • The first line of each paragraph should be indented
  • Quotations of 40 or more words should be set off in a block quote with no quotation marks
  • In-text citations should include the author’s last name and year of publication (e.g., Smith, 2019)

APA Research Paper Format Example

APA Research Paper Format Example is as follows:

The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health

University of XYZ

This study examines the relationship between social media use and mental health among college students. Data was collected through a survey of 500 students at the University of XYZ. Results suggest that social media use is significantly related to symptoms of depression and anxiety, and that the negative effects of social media are greater among frequent users.

Social media has become an increasingly important aspect of modern life, especially among young adults. While social media can have many positive effects, such as connecting people across distances and sharing information, there is growing concern about its impact on mental health. This study aims to examine the relationship between social media use and mental health among college students.

Participants: Participants were 500 college students at the University of XYZ, recruited through online advertisements and flyers posted on campus. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 25, with a mean age of 20.5 years. The sample was 60% female, 40% male, and 5% identified as non-binary or gender non-conforming.

Data was collected through an online survey administered through Qualtrics. The survey consisted of several measures, including the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for depression symptoms, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) for anxiety symptoms, and questions about social media use.

Procedure :

Participants were asked to complete the online survey at their convenience. The survey took approximately 20-30 minutes to complete. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlations, and multiple regression analysis.

Results indicated that social media use was significantly related to symptoms of depression (r = .32, p < .001) and anxiety (r = .29, p < .001). Regression analysis indicated that frequency of social media use was a significant predictor of both depression symptoms (β = .24, p < .001) and anxiety symptoms (β = .20, p < .001), even when controlling for age, gender, and other relevant factors.

The results of this study suggest that social media use is associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety among college students. The negative effects of social media are greater among frequent users. These findings have important implications for mental health professionals and educators, who should consider addressing the potential negative effects of social media use in their work with young adults.

References :

References should be listed in alphabetical order according to the author’s last name. For example:

  • Chou, H. T. G., & Edge, N. (2012). “They are happier and having better lives than I am”: The impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others’ lives. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(2), 117-121.
  • Twenge, J. M., Joiner, T. E., Rogers, M. L., & Martin, G. N. (2018). Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among U.S. adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time. Clinical Psychological Science, 6(1), 3-17.

Note: This is just a sample Example do not use this in your assignment.

MLA (Modern Language Association) Format

MLA (Modern Language Association) Format is as follows:

  • Page Layout : Use 8.5 x 11-inch white paper, with 1-inch margins on all sides. The font should be 12-point Times New Roman or a similar serif font.
  • Heading and Title : The first page of your research paper should include a heading and a title. The heading should include your name, your instructor’s name, the course title, and the date. The title should be centered and in title case (capitalizing the first letter of each important word).
  • In-Text Citations : Use parenthetical citations to indicate the source of your information. The citation should include the author’s last name and the page number(s) of the source. For example: (Smith 23).
  • Works Cited Page : At the end of your paper, include a Works Cited page that lists all the sources you used in your research. Each entry should include the author’s name, the title of the work, the publication information, and the medium of publication.
  • Formatting Quotations : Use double quotation marks for short quotations and block quotations for longer quotations. Indent the entire quotation five spaces from the left margin.
  • Formatting the Body : Use a clear and readable font and double-space your text throughout. The first line of each paragraph should be indented one-half inch from the left margin.

MLA Research Paper Template

MLA Research Paper Format Template is as follows:

  • Use 8.5 x 11 inch white paper.
  • Use a 12-point font, such as Times New Roman.
  • Use double-spacing throughout the entire paper, including the title page and works cited page.
  • Set the margins to 1 inch on all sides.
  • Use page numbers in the upper right corner, beginning with the first page of text.
  • Include a centered title for the research paper, using title case (capitalizing the first letter of each important word).
  • Include your name, instructor’s name, course name, and date in the upper left corner, double-spaced.

In-Text Citations

  • When quoting or paraphrasing information from sources, include an in-text citation within the text of your paper.
  • Use the author’s last name and the page number in parentheses at the end of the sentence, before the punctuation mark.
  • If the author’s name is mentioned in the sentence, only include the page number in parentheses.

Works Cited Page

  • List all sources cited in alphabetical order by the author’s last name.
  • Each entry should include the author’s name, title of the work, publication information, and medium of publication.
  • Use italics for book and journal titles, and quotation marks for article and chapter titles.
  • For online sources, include the date of access and the URL.

Here is an example of how the first page of a research paper in MLA format should look:

Headings and Subheadings

  • Use headings and subheadings to organize your paper and make it easier to read.
  • Use numerals to number your headings and subheadings (e.g. 1, 2, 3), and capitalize the first letter of each word.
  • The main heading should be centered and in boldface type, while subheadings should be left-aligned and in italics.
  • Use only one space after each period or punctuation mark.
  • Use quotation marks to indicate direct quotes from a source.
  • If the quote is more than four lines, format it as a block quote, indented one inch from the left margin and without quotation marks.
  • Use ellipses (…) to indicate omitted words from a quote, and brackets ([…]) to indicate added words.

Works Cited Examples

  • Book: Last Name, First Name. Title of Book. Publisher, Publication Year.
  • Journal Article: Last Name, First Name. “Title of Article.” Title of Journal, volume number, issue number, publication date, page numbers.
  • Website: Last Name, First Name. “Title of Webpage.” Title of Website, publication date, URL. Accessed date.

Here is an example of how a works cited entry for a book should look:

Smith, John. The Art of Writing Research Papers. Penguin, 2021.

MLA Research Paper Example

MLA Research Paper Format Example is as follows:

Your Professor’s Name

Course Name and Number

Date (in Day Month Year format)

Word Count (not including title page or Works Cited)

Title: The Impact of Video Games on Aggression Levels

Video games have become a popular form of entertainment among people of all ages. However, the impact of video games on aggression levels has been a subject of debate among scholars and researchers. While some argue that video games promote aggression and violent behavior, others argue that there is no clear link between video games and aggression levels. This research paper aims to explore the impact of video games on aggression levels among young adults.

Background:

The debate on the impact of video games on aggression levels has been ongoing for several years. According to the American Psychological Association, exposure to violent media, including video games, can increase aggression levels in children and adolescents. However, some researchers argue that there is no clear evidence to support this claim. Several studies have been conducted to examine the impact of video games on aggression levels, but the results have been mixed.

Methodology:

This research paper used a quantitative research approach to examine the impact of video games on aggression levels among young adults. A sample of 100 young adults between the ages of 18 and 25 was selected for the study. The participants were asked to complete a questionnaire that measured their aggression levels and their video game habits.

The results of the study showed that there was a significant correlation between video game habits and aggression levels among young adults. The participants who reported playing violent video games for more than 5 hours per week had higher aggression levels than those who played less than 5 hours per week. The study also found that male participants were more likely to play violent video games and had higher aggression levels than female participants.

The findings of this study support the claim that video games can increase aggression levels among young adults. However, it is important to note that the study only examined the impact of video games on aggression levels and did not take into account other factors that may contribute to aggressive behavior. It is also important to note that not all video games promote violence and aggression, and some games may have a positive impact on cognitive and social skills.

Conclusion :

In conclusion, this research paper provides evidence to support the claim that video games can increase aggression levels among young adults. However, it is important to conduct further research to examine the impact of video games on other aspects of behavior and to explore the potential benefits of video games. Parents and educators should be aware of the potential impact of video games on aggression levels and should encourage young adults to engage in a variety of activities that promote cognitive and social skills.

Works Cited:

  • American Psychological Association. (2017). Violent Video Games: Myths, Facts, and Unanswered Questions. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2017/08/violent-video-games
  • Ferguson, C. J. (2015). Do Angry Birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children’s and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(5), 646-666.
  • Gentile, D. A., Swing, E. L., Lim, C. G., & Khoo, A. (2012). Video game playing, attention problems, and impulsiveness: Evidence of bidirectional causality. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 1(1), 62-70.
  • Greitemeyer, T. (2014). Effects of prosocial video games on prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(4), 530-548.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chicago/Turabian Formate is as follows:

  • Margins : Use 1-inch margins on all sides of the paper.
  • Font : Use a readable font such as Times New Roman or Arial, and use a 12-point font size.
  • Page numbering : Number all pages in the upper right-hand corner, beginning with the first page of text. Use Arabic numerals.
  • Title page: Include a title page with the title of the paper, your name, course title and number, instructor’s name, and the date. The title should be centered on the page and in title case (capitalize the first letter of each word).
  • Headings: Use headings to organize your paper. The first level of headings should be centered and in boldface or italics. The second level of headings should be left-aligned and in boldface or italics. Use as many levels of headings as necessary to organize your paper.
  • In-text citations : Use footnotes or endnotes to cite sources within the text of your paper. The first citation for each source should be a full citation, and subsequent citations can be shortened. Use superscript numbers to indicate footnotes or endnotes.
  • Bibliography : Include a bibliography at the end of your paper, listing all sources cited in your paper. The bibliography should be in alphabetical order by the author’s last name, and each entry should include the author’s name, title of the work, publication information, and date of publication.
  • Formatting of quotations: Use block quotations for quotations that are longer than four lines. Indent the entire quotation one inch from the left margin, and do not use quotation marks. Single-space the quotation, and double-space between paragraphs.
  • Tables and figures: Use tables and figures to present data and illustrations. Number each table and figure sequentially, and provide a brief title for each. Place tables and figures as close as possible to the text that refers to them.
  • Spelling and grammar : Use correct spelling and grammar throughout your paper. Proofread carefully for errors.

Chicago/Turabian Research Paper Template

Chicago/Turabian Research Paper Template is as folows:

Title of Paper

Name of Student

Professor’s Name

I. Introduction

A. Background Information

B. Research Question

C. Thesis Statement

II. Literature Review

A. Overview of Existing Literature

B. Analysis of Key Literature

C. Identification of Gaps in Literature

III. Methodology

A. Research Design

B. Data Collection

C. Data Analysis

IV. Results

A. Presentation of Findings

B. Analysis of Findings

C. Discussion of Implications

V. Conclusion

A. Summary of Findings

B. Implications for Future Research

C. Conclusion

VI. References

A. Bibliography

B. In-Text Citations

VII. Appendices (if necessary)

A. Data Tables

C. Additional Supporting Materials

Chicago/Turabian Research Paper Example

Title: The Impact of Social Media on Political Engagement

Name: John Smith

Class: POLS 101

Professor: Dr. Jane Doe

Date: April 8, 2023

I. Introduction:

Social media has become an integral part of our daily lives. People use social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram to connect with friends and family, share their opinions, and stay informed about current events. With the rise of social media, there has been a growing interest in understanding its impact on various aspects of society, including political engagement. In this paper, I will examine the relationship between social media use and political engagement, specifically focusing on how social media influences political participation and political attitudes.

II. Literature Review:

There is a growing body of literature on the impact of social media on political engagement. Some scholars argue that social media has a positive effect on political participation by providing new channels for political communication and mobilization (Delli Carpini & Keeter, 1996; Putnam, 2000). Others, however, suggest that social media can have a negative impact on political engagement by creating filter bubbles that reinforce existing beliefs and discourage political dialogue (Pariser, 2011; Sunstein, 2001).

III. Methodology:

To examine the relationship between social media use and political engagement, I conducted a survey of 500 college students. The survey included questions about social media use, political participation, and political attitudes. The data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression analysis.

Iv. Results:

The results of the survey indicate that social media use is positively associated with political participation. Specifically, respondents who reported using social media to discuss politics were more likely to have participated in a political campaign, attended a political rally, or contacted a political representative. Additionally, social media use was found to be associated with more positive attitudes towards political engagement, such as increased trust in government and belief in the effectiveness of political action.

V. Conclusion:

The findings of this study suggest that social media has a positive impact on political engagement, by providing new opportunities for political communication and mobilization. However, there is also a need for caution, as social media can also create filter bubbles that reinforce existing beliefs and discourage political dialogue. Future research should continue to explore the complex relationship between social media and political engagement, and develop strategies to harness the potential benefits of social media while mitigating its potential negative effects.

Vii. References:

  • Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. Yale University Press.
  • Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin.
  • Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.
  • Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton University Press.

IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) Format

IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) Research Paper Format is as follows:

  • Title : A concise and informative title that accurately reflects the content of the paper.
  • Abstract : A brief summary of the paper, typically no more than 250 words, that includes the purpose of the study, the methods used, the key findings, and the main conclusions.
  • Introduction : An overview of the background, context, and motivation for the research, including a clear statement of the problem being addressed and the objectives of the study.
  • Literature review: A critical analysis of the relevant research and scholarship on the topic, including a discussion of any gaps or limitations in the existing literature.
  • Methodology : A detailed description of the methods used to collect and analyze data, including any experiments or simulations, data collection instruments or procedures, and statistical analyses.
  • Results : A clear and concise presentation of the findings, including any relevant tables, graphs, or figures.
  • Discussion : A detailed interpretation of the results, including a comparison of the findings with previous research, a discussion of the implications of the results, and any recommendations for future research.
  • Conclusion : A summary of the key findings and main conclusions of the study.
  • References : A list of all sources cited in the paper, formatted according to IEEE guidelines.

In addition to these elements, an IEEE research paper should also follow certain formatting guidelines, including using 12-point font, double-spaced text, and numbered headings and subheadings. Additionally, any tables, figures, or equations should be clearly labeled and referenced in the text.

AMA (American Medical Association) Style

AMA (American Medical Association) Style Research Paper Format:

  • Title Page: This page includes the title of the paper, the author’s name, institutional affiliation, and any acknowledgments or disclaimers.
  • Abstract: The abstract is a brief summary of the paper that outlines the purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of the study. It is typically limited to 250 words or less.
  • Introduction: The introduction provides a background of the research problem, defines the research question, and outlines the objectives and hypotheses of the study.
  • Methods: The methods section describes the research design, participants, procedures, and instruments used to collect and analyze data.
  • Results: The results section presents the findings of the study in a clear and concise manner, using graphs, tables, and charts where appropriate.
  • Discussion: The discussion section interprets the results, explains their significance, and relates them to previous research in the field.
  • Conclusion: The conclusion summarizes the main points of the paper, discusses the implications of the findings, and suggests future research directions.
  • References: The reference list includes all sources cited in the paper, listed in alphabetical order by author’s last name.

In addition to these sections, the AMA format requires that authors follow specific guidelines for citing sources in the text and formatting their references. The AMA style uses a superscript number system for in-text citations and provides specific formats for different types of sources, such as books, journal articles, and websites.

Harvard Style

Harvard Style Research Paper format is as follows:

  • Title page: This should include the title of your paper, your name, the name of your institution, and the date of submission.
  • Abstract : This is a brief summary of your paper, usually no more than 250 words. It should outline the main points of your research and highlight your findings.
  • Introduction : This section should introduce your research topic, provide background information, and outline your research question or thesis statement.
  • Literature review: This section should review the relevant literature on your topic, including previous research studies, academic articles, and other sources.
  • Methodology : This section should describe the methods you used to conduct your research, including any data collection methods, research instruments, and sampling techniques.
  • Results : This section should present your findings in a clear and concise manner, using tables, graphs, and other visual aids if necessary.
  • Discussion : This section should interpret your findings and relate them to the broader research question or thesis statement. You should also discuss the implications of your research and suggest areas for future study.
  • Conclusion : This section should summarize your main findings and provide a final statement on the significance of your research.
  • References : This is a list of all the sources you cited in your paper, presented in alphabetical order by author name. Each citation should include the author’s name, the title of the source, the publication date, and other relevant information.

In addition to these sections, a Harvard Style research paper may also include a table of contents, appendices, and other supplementary materials as needed. It is important to follow the specific formatting guidelines provided by your instructor or academic institution when preparing your research paper in Harvard Style.

Vancouver Style

Vancouver Style Research Paper format is as follows:

The Vancouver citation style is commonly used in the biomedical sciences and is known for its use of numbered references. Here is a basic format for a research paper using the Vancouver citation style:

  • Title page: Include the title of your paper, your name, the name of your institution, and the date.
  • Abstract : This is a brief summary of your research paper, usually no more than 250 words.
  • Introduction : Provide some background information on your topic and state the purpose of your research.
  • Methods : Describe the methods you used to conduct your research, including the study design, data collection, and statistical analysis.
  • Results : Present your findings in a clear and concise manner, using tables and figures as needed.
  • Discussion : Interpret your results and explain their significance. Also, discuss any limitations of your study and suggest directions for future research.
  • References : List all of the sources you cited in your paper in numerical order. Each reference should include the author’s name, the title of the article or book, the name of the journal or publisher, the year of publication, and the page numbers.

ACS (American Chemical Society) Style

ACS (American Chemical Society) Style Research Paper format is as follows:

The American Chemical Society (ACS) Style is a citation style commonly used in chemistry and related fields. When formatting a research paper in ACS Style, here are some guidelines to follow:

  • Paper Size and Margins : Use standard 8.5″ x 11″ paper with 1-inch margins on all sides.
  • Font: Use a 12-point serif font (such as Times New Roman) for the main text. The title should be in bold and a larger font size.
  • Title Page : The title page should include the title of the paper, the authors’ names and affiliations, and the date of submission. The title should be centered on the page and written in bold font. The authors’ names should be centered below the title, followed by their affiliations and the date.
  • Abstract : The abstract should be a brief summary of the paper, no more than 250 words. It should be on a separate page and include the title of the paper, the authors’ names and affiliations, and the text of the abstract.
  • Main Text : The main text should be organized into sections with headings that clearly indicate the content of each section. The introduction should provide background information and state the research question or hypothesis. The methods section should describe the procedures used in the study. The results section should present the findings of the study, and the discussion section should interpret the results and provide conclusions.
  • References: Use the ACS Style guide to format the references cited in the paper. In-text citations should be numbered sequentially throughout the text and listed in numerical order at the end of the paper.
  • Figures and Tables: Figures and tables should be numbered sequentially and referenced in the text. Each should have a descriptive caption that explains its content. Figures should be submitted in a high-quality electronic format.
  • Supporting Information: Additional information such as data, graphs, and videos may be included as supporting information. This should be included in a separate file and referenced in the main text.
  • Acknowledgments : Acknowledge any funding sources or individuals who contributed to the research.

ASA (American Sociological Association) Style

ASA (American Sociological Association) Style Research Paper format is as follows:

  • Title Page: The title page of an ASA style research paper should include the title of the paper, the author’s name, and the institutional affiliation. The title should be centered and should be in title case (the first letter of each major word should be capitalized).
  • Abstract: An abstract is a brief summary of the paper that should appear on a separate page immediately following the title page. The abstract should be no more than 200 words in length and should summarize the main points of the paper.
  • Main Body: The main body of the paper should begin on a new page following the abstract page. The paper should be double-spaced, with 1-inch margins on all sides, and should be written in 12-point Times New Roman font. The main body of the paper should include an introduction, a literature review, a methodology section, results, and a discussion.
  • References : The reference section should appear on a separate page at the end of the paper. All sources cited in the paper should be listed in alphabetical order by the author’s last name. Each reference should include the author’s name, the title of the work, the publication information, and the date of publication.
  • Appendices : Appendices are optional and should only be included if they contain information that is relevant to the study but too lengthy to be included in the main body of the paper. If you include appendices, each one should be labeled with a letter (e.g., Appendix A, Appendix B, etc.) and should be referenced in the main body of the paper.

APSA (American Political Science Association) Style

APSA (American Political Science Association) Style Research Paper format is as follows:

  • Title Page: The title page should include the title of the paper, the author’s name, the name of the course or instructor, and the date.
  • Abstract : An abstract is typically not required in APSA style papers, but if one is included, it should be brief and summarize the main points of the paper.
  • Introduction : The introduction should provide an overview of the research topic, the research question, and the main argument or thesis of the paper.
  • Literature Review : The literature review should summarize the existing research on the topic and provide a context for the research question.
  • Methods : The methods section should describe the research methods used in the paper, including data collection and analysis.
  • Results : The results section should present the findings of the research.
  • Discussion : The discussion section should interpret the results and connect them back to the research question and argument.
  • Conclusion : The conclusion should summarize the main findings and implications of the research.
  • References : The reference list should include all sources cited in the paper, formatted according to APSA style guidelines.

In-text citations in APSA style use parenthetical citation, which includes the author’s last name, publication year, and page number(s) if applicable. For example, (Smith 2010, 25).

About the author

' src=

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Paper Citation

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

Delimitations

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Design

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Research Paper Title

Research Paper Title – Writing Guide and Example

Research Paper Introduction

Research Paper Introduction – Writing Guide and...

Research Paper Conclusion

Research Paper Conclusion – Writing Guide and...

  • Mobile Forms
  • INTEGRATIONS
  • See 100+ integrations
  • FEATURED INTEGRATIONS
  • See more Integrations
  • See more CRM Integrations

FTP

  • See more Storage Integrations
  • See more Payment Integrations

Mad Mimi

  • See more Email Integrations
  • Jotform Teams
  • Enterprise Mobile
  • Prefill Forms
  • HIPAA Forms
  • Secure Forms
  • Assign Forms
  • Online Payments
  • See more features
  • Multiple Users
  • Admin Console
  • White Labeling
  • See more Enterprise Features
  • Contact Sales
  • Contact Support
  • Help Center
  • Jotform Books
  • Jotform Academy

Get a dedicated support team with Jotform Enterprise.

Apply to Jotform Enterprise for a dedicated support team.

  • Sign Up for Free
  • Research Evaluation Form

More templates like this

Event Registration Form Template

Event Registration Form

An event registration form is a form that is used to register for events. With the Event Registration Form, you can collect information about attendees and ensure that you can accommodate them all. Use this form to register for events such as conferences and seminars. Whether you need a form to collect information about your event attendees or to use as a speaker application form, this Event Registration Form is a great starter template. Simply customize it to match the event you’re organizing!  With the Event Registration Form, collecting information and reserving spots is a piece of cake. Simply set the form fields to accept multiple responses and you’ll be able to know how many people have signed up before you even send out your invitations — and with Jotform’s 100+ integrations, you can sync bookings to your storage platform, payment processor, and CRM. When it’s time to process payments for your event, you’ve got plenty of options to choose from. Integrate with PayPal or Stripe for fast, secure payments — and with our free mobile app, you can collect responses even when you’re not at your computer!

Class Registration Form Template

Class Registration

Streamline student registration with the template form providing student contact information, ID and course selection which can be used to arrange classes accordingly. You can use this template as your basis and craft your own form with a variety of tools and widgets as your requirements. 

College Admission Form Template

College Admission Form

This is a sample Admissions Form for educational institutions, such as private schools or universities. The template comes in handy for busy teams that needs to gather, sort, and track admissions. You can ask for student details and simultaneously collect application payments that will eventually help you collect valuable information as well as save time. Whether you’re a teacher, advisor, admissions counselor, or anyone else, use your College Admission Form to collect information from potential students online.Simply embed the form on your website or share a link to get responses directly in your Jotform account. If you’d like to personalize the form further, use our free Form Builder to add your school’s logo, change the background image, or add more form fields to collect more information. With Jotform, you can do it all — collect information, convert submissions to PDFs, and keep your college admissions form secure.This admissions form has a total of 8 different form fields, such as;Name field (first, middle, and last name)Birth date fieldSingle choice field (gender)Dropdown list field (citizenship information)Phone number fieldE-mail address fieldAddress field

  • Form Templates /

Education Forms

Streamline student registration with the template form providing student contact information, ID and course selection which can be used to arrange classes accordingly. Customize it by adding new fields as your requirements.

Leave Request Form Template

Leave Request Form

The template allows getting instant leave requests from employees with all relevant information that is needed. You can add more customized fields with Jotform.

Mini Math Quiz Form Template

Mini Math Quiz

Conduct quizzes online and grade them automatically with our free Math Quiz template. Great for remote learning. Students can fill it out on any device.

Course Evaluation Form Template

Course Evaluation Form

A suitable Form to learn more about your student's perspective and how they experienced the course through customizable widgets allowing your students to rate and evaluate the course and how it went for the semester as a whole.

Student Health Forms

Training Request For Nursing Education Form Template

Training Request For Nursing Education

Does your company or business offer training services for nursing education? Use this training request form for students to book for the training and have them customized the training that fits their needs. This training request form template asks personal and contact information, date of training, training medium and etc. Accept training requests from students now through this training request template to help them increase their engagement and develop their skills. Our training request form sample can be customized and embedded in your website!

Student Mental Health Check Form Template

Student Mental Health Check Form

A student mental health check form is used by school psychologists and educators to check up on students’ mental health. No coding!

Research Questionnaire Form Template

Research Questionnaire

A structured questionnaire on a research carried out to remedy illnesses associated to ageing and physical inactivity among leaders.

Student Medical Information Form Template

Student Medical Information Form

A student medical information form stores and organizes a student’s medical information and assessments in one place.

Parent-Teacher Conference Forms

Tutor Appointment Form Template

Tutor Appointment Form

Schedule appointments for your tutoring sessions. Free appointment form for tutors. Easy to customize and embed. Works on any device. No coding required.

Parent Teacher Conference Form Template

Parent Teacher Conference Form

A Parent Teacher Conference Form is a form template designed to facilitate communication between teachers and parents

School Survey For Parents Form Template

School Survey For Parents

Whether you’re teaching young students in-person or online, it’s important to understand how their parents are involved with their education. Find out how involved parents are with their children’s schooling with our free School Survey for Parents.

Parent Roles And Responsibilities Survey Form Template

Parent Roles And Responsibilities Survey

A Parent Roles and Responsibilities Survey is used by teachers to assess the skills and knowledge of a student’s parents. No coding.

Online Quiz Form Template

Online Quiz

Create a custom quiz for your classroom with this free Online Quiz template. Easy to customize and share. Fill out on any device. Great for remote learning!

Spelling Quiz Form Template

Spelling Quiz

No matter what grade level you teach, take your spelling tests online with our free Spelling Quiz Template! Customize the template to include the words on your spelling and vocabulary lists, then embed it in your class website or email a link to your students.

Exam Registration Form Template

Exam Registration Form

An exam registration form is the ideal way to let your students schedule their own exams. In this form sample, you can collect student ID and course registration numbers. And adding additional fields is incredibly simple--just drag and drop them from Jotform’s famous form builder. Lastly, before you’re finished adding fields, add custom branding to match the look and feel of your school exactly. Try this exam registration form today for free!

Parent Feedback Forms

Daycare Parent Survey Form Template

Daycare Parent Survey

Get feedback about your daycare from parents. Free online survey template for daycares. Easy to customize and fill out. Works on any device. No coding.

Distance Learning Feedback Form For Parents Form Template

Distance Learning Feedback Form For Parents

Identify the areas where the school can improve on in terms of virtual classes by using this Distance Learning Feedback Form for Parents. This template can be embedded on any webpage or be accessed via the direct link.

Relax Kids Term Feedback Form Template

Relax Kids Term Feedback Form

A feedback form that can be used to get testimonial at the end of a block of sessions.

Other Education Forms

An event registration form is a form that is used to register for events.

This is a sample Admissions Form for educational institutions, such as private schools or universities. Collect information from potential students online!

Training Application Form Template

Training Application Form

This training signup form collects the information needed to register for a training or educational course. Use this form to sign up participants and students that are seeking additional training and educational services.

Student Registration Form Template

Student Registration Form

A student registration form collects all the necessary information to register students for a course. Customize, integrate, and embed this Student Registration Form for free.

Sample Scholarship Application Form Template

Sample Scholarship Application Form

A comprehensive Scholarship Application Form including a complete questionnaire with scholarship details allows for collecting all the necessary applicant data. The sample template can be easily customized with your own content.

Music School Registration Form Template

Music School Registration Form

Music School Application Form asks basic information about the student, their preferred class days and starts time. Have your future students fill this music class registration form anytime to become a member of your music school.

Multiple Choice Test Template Form Template

Multiple Choice Test Template

Test your students on what they know with our free online Multiple Choice Test Template! Just add your test’s questions and answers to this template, embed the test on your website or email a link to students, and start accepting submissions instantly.

School Registration Form Template

School Registration Form

A school registration form allows students to register for classes online. If you’re an educator or administrator, use this free School Registration Form to swiftly gather student information online.

Business Loan Application Form Template

Business Loan Application Form

A template which is helpful for small/medium business owners to easily apply for a loan through four categories to fill as personal information, project details, financial information and loan details.

University Recourse Form Template

University Recourse Form

A University Recourse Form is a document that allows students to appeal to the University for a reconsideration of their academic records. Accessible and editable through any mobile device.

Student Enrollment Form Template

Student Enrollment Form

Collect new student registrations with Jotform’s free Student Enrollment Form. Securely store responses online. Collect fee payments via 35+ payment gateways.

Responsive Workshop Registration Form Template

Responsive Workshop Registration Form

Mobile-optimized Responsive Registration Form designed with a clear header that allows providing a short description of the workshop content, collects primary contact details, allows to make suggestions and add further comments.

Training Feedback Form Template

Training Feedback Form

A Training Feedback Form is a form template designed to collect feedback from trainees about a training session.

Student Survey Form Template

Student Survey

Find out what students think about topics like curriculum, materials, and facilities with Student Survey.

Sample Course Evaluation Form Template

Sample Course Evaluation Form

Gather student feedback online with this free sample course evaluation. Easy to customize and embed. Integrate with 100+ apps. No coding. Perfect for teachers!

Geography Quiz Form Template

Geography Quiz

Quiz students on geography with this free online quiz template you can customize for your classroom. Easy to embed on your class website. No coding required.

Student Progress Report Template Form Template

Student Progress Report Template

Here's a student progress report template that you can use to monitor your student's progress. It contains questions that will help improve your student's performance on his/her academic ability, focus (behavior/attitude/interest), or both.

Quiz Form With A Calculated Number Of Correct Answers Form Template

Quiz Form With A Calculated Number Of Correct Answers

Calculate a number of correct answers with a Form Calculation Widget, and show that number on the form's Thank You page.

Quiz Form Template

Create a quiz with a Quiz Form on your webpage. Collect answers from your website visitors with a secure Quiz Form widget.

About Education Forms

Get rid of paperwork! Jotform offers online education forms for educational professionals and students. Educators need forms more than any other industry -- whether it's for collecting applications, evaluating instructors, or even collecting donations -- so it's important to be able to make forms easily. Whether you're an educator in K-12 or higher education, we have a form template for you.

Our education form templates are fully customizable and can be formatted to fit your needs. Get started by either selecting one of education form samples or creating your own template. Jotform education form templates are free and easy-to-use.

Try one of our free online education form templates today.

Your account is currently limited to {formLimit} forms.

Go to My Forms and delete an existing form or upgrade your account to increase your form limit.

  • Search Menu
  • Advance articles
  • Author Guidelines
  • Submission Site
  • Open Access
  • Why Publish?
  • About Research Evaluation
  • Editorial Board
  • Advertising and Corporate Services
  • Journals Career Network
  • Self-Archiving Policy
  • Dispatch Dates
  • Journals on Oxford Academic
  • Books on Oxford Academic

Issue Cover

Julia Melkers

Emanuela Reale

Thed van Leeuwen

About the journal

Research Evaluation is an interdisciplinary peer-reviewed, international journal. Its subject matter is the evaluation of activities concerned with scientific research, technological development and innovation …

""

Why submit to Research Evaluation ?

Learn more about the submission process, our author benefits, and how you can join our prestigious author community.

Find out more

Browse high impact Market Research and Public Opinion articles from Oxford University Press Journals.

High Impact Articles

Keep up to date with the latest research your peers are reading and citing, with a collection of the most cited articles published in  Research Evaluation  in recent years.

research paper evaluation format

The JHPS editorial board

Learn more about JHPS’ s international editorial board.

globe

Measuring the Impact of Arts and Humanities Research in Europe

Read the latest virtual issue exploring the societal value of arts and humanities research.

Latest articles

Alerts in the Inbox

Email alerts

Register to receive table of contents email alerts as soon as new issues of Research Evaluation are published online.

Recommend to your library

Recommend to your library

Fill out our simple online form to recommend Research Evaluation to your library.

Recommend now

COPE logo

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

publicationethics.org

Related Titles

Cover image of current issue from Science and Public Policy

  • Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

  • Online ISSN 1471-5449
  • Print ISSN 0958-2029
  • Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
  • 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

  • Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
  • Cookie settings
  • Cookie policy
  • Privacy policy
  • Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

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

Our approach

  • Responsibility
  • Infrastructure
  • Try Meta AI

CYBERSECEVAL 2: A Wide-Ranging Cybersecurity Evaluation Suite for Large Language Models

April 18, 2024

Large language models (LLMs) introduce new security risks, but there are few comprehensive evaluation suites to measure and reduce these risks. We present CYBERSECEVAL 2, a novel benchmark to quantify LLM security risks and capabilities. We introduce two new areas for testing: prompt injection and code interpreter abuse. We evaluated multiple state of the art (SOTA) LLMs, including GPT-4, Mistral, Meta Llama 3 70B-Instruct, and Code Llama. Our results show conditioning away risk of attack remains an unsolved problem; for example, all tested models showed between 25% and 50% successful prompt injection tests. Our code is open source and can be used to evaluate other LLMs. We further introduce the safety-utility tradeoff : conditioning an LLM to reject unsafe prompts can cause the LLM to falsely reject answering benign prompts, which lowers utility. We propose quantifying this tradeoff using False Refusal Rate (FRR). As an illustration, we introduce a novel test set to quantify FRR for cyberattack helpfulness risk. We find many LLMs able to successfully comply with “borderline” benign requests while still rejecting most unsafe requests. Finally, we quantify the utility of LLMs for automating a core cybersecurity task, that of exploiting software vulnerabilities. This is important because the offensive capabilities of LLMs are of intense interest; we quantify this by creating novel test sets for four representative problems. We find that models with coding capabilities perform better than those without, but that further work is needed for LLMs to become proficient at exploit generation. Our code is open source and can be used to evaluate other LLMs.

GenAI Cybersec Team

Manish Bhatt

Sahana Chennabasappa

Cyrus Nikolaidis

Daniel Song

Shengye Wan

Faizan Ahmad

Cornelius Aschermann

Yaohui Chen

Dhaval Kapil

David Molnar

Spencer Whitman

Joshua Saxe

research paper evaluation format

Help Us Pioneer The Future of AI

We share our open source frameworks, tools, libraries, and models for everything from research exploration to large-scale production deployment..

Product experiences

Foundational models

Latest news

Meta © 2024

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 22.4.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Evaluation of Prompts to Simplify Cardiovascular Disease Information Generated Using a Large Language Model: Cross-Sectional Study

Authors of this article:

Author Orcid Image

VASA-1: Lifelike Audio-Driven Talking Faces Generated in Real Time

  • Follow on Twitter
  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on LinkedIn
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Follow on Instagram
  • Subscribe to our RSS feed

Share this page:

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit

IMAGES

  1. Evaluation Essay

    research paper evaluation format

  2. Descriptive essay: Common research paper formats

    research paper evaluation format

  3. Reflection essay: Critical evaluation of a research paper example

    research paper evaluation format

  4. 001 Evaluation Essays Free Pdf Format Download Justifying An Simple

    research paper evaluation format

  5. Checklist For Evaluating A Scientific Research Paper

    research paper evaluation format

  6. Evaluation Essay

    research paper evaluation format

VIDEO

  1. DOWNLOAD A COPY OF SCHOOL EVALUATION FORMAT

  2. PAPER EVALUATION WITH ANSWERS WRITING FOUNDATION 02 PART 01

  3. Best Format For Secondary Research Paper #problemsolving

  4. វគ្គ2 How to assess a thesis

  5. Paper Correction "REVEALED"

  6. How to Make Table of Contents for Review Paper ?

COMMENTS

  1. Evaluating Research in Academic Journals: A Practical Guide to Realistic Evaluation

    Academic Journals. Evaluating Research in Academic Journals is a guide for students who are learning how to. evaluate reports of empirical research published in academic journals. It breaks down ...

  2. 12.7 Evaluation: Effectiveness of Research Paper

    5. Skillful. The text always adheres to the "Editing Focus" of this chapter: integrating sources and quotations appropriately as discussed in Section 12.6. The text also shows ample evidence of the writer's intent to consciously meet or challenge conventional expectations in rhetorically effective ways.

  3. Evaluating Research Articles

    Healthcare Research by Joan Hohl (Editor); Helena Priest (Editor); Paula Roberts (Editor) ISBN: 9780470519325. Publication Date: 2010-04-05. Chapter 5 of this book explains the critical appraisal process and provides examples of it being applied so that you can see the reasoning for yourself. How to Read a Paper by Trisha Greenhalgh.

  4. How to Write a Literature Review

    Examples of literature reviews. Step 1 - Search for relevant literature. Step 2 - Evaluate and select sources. Step 3 - Identify themes, debates, and gaps. Step 4 - Outline your literature review's structure. Step 5 - Write your literature review.

  5. RCE 672: Research and Program Evaluation: APA Sample Paper

    RCE 672: Research and Program Evaluation: APA Sample Paper. Home; Research; Search Databases Toggle Dropdown. Tips for GALILEO ; Evaluate Sources; Write Your Paper Toggle Dropdown. How to Paraphrase

  6. Research Paper: A step-by-step guide: 7. Evaluating Sources

    Evaluation Criteria. It's very important to evaluate the materials you find to make sure they are appropriate for a research paper. It's not enough that the information is relevant; it must also be credible. You will want to find more than enough resources, so that you can pick and choose the best for your paper.

  7. Research Paper Format

    Formatting a Chicago paper. The main guidelines for writing a paper in Chicago style (also known as Turabian style) are: Use a standard font like 12 pt Times New Roman. Use 1 inch margins or larger. Apply double line spacing. Indent every new paragraph ½ inch. Place page numbers in the top right or bottom center.

  8. PDF Developing a research evaluation framework

    The traditional approaches to research evaluation. are summative, assessing, for example, outputs such as the quality and number of papers published, as measured with bibliometrics, or comparing institutions' past performance. These examine what has happened in the past but do not tell us why.

  9. Research Evaluation

    This chapter is about research evaluation. Evaluation is quintessential to research. ... Figure 5.1 shows an example of a review template for conference papers. Fig. 5.1. A review template for a conference paper. Full size image. Review templates also ask reviewers to self-assess their confidence, by rating how well-versed they are in the ...

  10. Measuring research: A guide to research evaluation frameworks and tools

    A guide to research evaluation frameworks and tools. by Susan Guthrie, Watu Wamae, Stephanie Diepeveen, Steven Wooding, Jonathan Grant. Interest in and demand for the evaluation of research is increasing internationally. This is linked to a growing accountability agenda, driven by the demand for good governance and management growing in profile ...

  11. How to Write a Peer Review

    Here's how your outline might look: 1. Summary of the research and your overall impression. In your own words, summarize what the manuscript claims to report. This shows the editor how you interpreted the manuscript and will highlight any major differences in perspective between you and the other reviewers. Give an overview of the manuscript ...

  12. Critical appraisal of published research papers

    INTRODUCTION. Critical appraisal of a research paper is defined as "The process of carefully and systematically examining research to judge its trustworthiness, value and relevance in a particular context."[] Since scientific literature is rapidly expanding with more than 12,000 articles being added to the MEDLINE database per week,[] critical appraisal is very important to distinguish ...

  13. Evaluating Sources

    Lateral reading. Lateral reading is the act of evaluating the credibility of a source by comparing it to other sources. This allows you to: Verify evidence. Contextualize information. Find potential weaknesses. If a source is using methods or drawing conclusions that are incompatible with other research in its field, it may not be reliable.

  14. How to write a peer review

    Reviewers, therefore, need a sound understanding of their role and obligations to ensure the integrity of this process. This also helps them maintain quality research, and to help protect the public from flawed and misleading research findings. Learning to peer review is also an important step in improving your own professional development.

  15. PDF Formatting a Research Paper

    Do not use a period after your title or after any heading in the paper (e.g., Works Cited). Begin your text on a new, double-spaced line after the title, indenting the first line of the paragraph half an inch from the left margin. Fig. 1. The top of the first page of a research paper.

  16. Step by Step Guide to Reviewing a Manuscript

    Briefly summarize what the paper is about and what the findings are. Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing literature and current knowledge. Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly confirmatory. Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness.

  17. How to review a paper

    22 Sep 2016. By Elisabeth Pain. Share: A good peer review requires disciplinary expertise, a keen and critical eye, and a diplomatic and constructive approach. Credit: dmark/iStockphoto. As junior scientists develop their expertise and make names for themselves, they are increasingly likely to receive invitations to review research manuscripts.

  18. How to Write a Research Paper

    Instead it asks a question and should come to an answer through the evaluation of source material. As its name suggests, the aim is to analyze the source material and offer a fresh perspective on the results. ... Make sure that you follow their instruction. If possible, ask to see a sample research paper in the required format. Cite, Cite and Cite.

  19. Research Paper Format

    Research paper format is an essential aspect of academic writing that plays a crucial role in the communication of research findings.The format of a research paper depends on various factors such as the discipline, style guide, and purpose of the research. It includes guidelines for the structure, citation style, referencing, and other elements of the paper that contribute to its overall ...

  20. Research Evaluation Form Template

    Do you need a research evaluation form for business purposes or your course in the school? If so, you can use this research feedback form in order to evaluate the selection, understanding of the research topic, usage of technology, usage of the digital media -cause it increases the attention-, findings or evidence, grammar rules and so on. Moreover, for detailed feedbacks, evaluator always can ...

  21. Research Evaluation

    Research Evaluation is an interdisciplinary peer-reviewed, international journal. Its subject matter is the evaluation of activities concerned with scientific research, technological development and innovation …. Find out more.

  22. What Is Peer Review?

    The most common types are: Single-blind review. Double-blind review. Triple-blind review. Collaborative review. Open review. Relatedly, peer assessment is a process where your peers provide you with feedback on something you've written, based on a set of criteria or benchmarks from an instructor.

  23. Computers

    Therefore, performance evaluation and analysis of such systems is a critical research task that needs to be conducted by researchers. In this paper, a new model structure of an urban-suburban environment in a 5G network formed of seven cells with a central urban cell (Hot spot) surrounded by six suburban cells is introduced.

  24. CYBERSECEVAL 2: A Wide-Ranging Cybersecurity Evaluation Suite for Large

    Large language models (LLMs) introduce new security risks, but there are few comprehensive evaluation suites to measure and reduce these risks. We present CYBERSECEVAL 2, a novel benchmark to quantify LLM security risks and capabilities. We introduce two new areas for testing: prompt injection and code interpreter abuse.

  25. Sustainability

    It could obtain better evaluation accuracy even if the sample size is small. ... Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions ...

  26. Journal of Medical Internet Research

    Background: Patient and staff experience is a vital factor to consider in the evaluation of remote patient monitoring (RPM) interventions. However, no comprehensive overview of available RPM patient and staff experience-measuring methods and tools exists. Objective: This review aimed at obtaining a comprehensive set of experience constructs and corresponding measuring instruments used in ...

  27. Journal of Medical Internet Research

    Journal of Medical Internet Research 8309 articles ... Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https: ... first published December 11, 2023. Evaluation of Prompts to Simplify Cardiovascular Disease Information Generated Using a Large Language Model: Cross-Sectional Study ...

  28. VASA-1

    We introduce VASA, a framework for generating lifelike talking faces of virtual characters with appealing visual affective skills (VAS), given a single static image and a speech audio clip. Our premiere model, VASA-1, is capable of not only producing lip movements that are exquisitely synchronized with the audio, but also capturing a large ...