How to Write a Research Paper Introduction (with Examples)
The research paper introduction section, along with the Title and Abstract, can be considered the face of any research paper. The following article is intended to guide you in organizing and writing the research paper introduction for a quality academic article or dissertation.
The research paper introduction aims to present the topic to the reader. A study will only be accepted for publishing if you can ascertain that the available literature cannot answer your research question. So it is important to ensure that you have read important studies on that particular topic, especially those within the last five to ten years, and that they are properly referenced in this section. 1 What should be included in the research paper introduction is decided by what you want to tell readers about the reason behind the research and how you plan to fill the knowledge gap. The best research paper introduction provides a systemic review of existing work and demonstrates additional work that needs to be done. It needs to be brief, captivating, and well-referenced; a well-drafted research paper introduction will help the researcher win half the battle.
The introduction for a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:
- Present your research topic
- Capture reader interest
- Summarize existing research
- Position your own approach
- Define your specific research problem and problem statement
- Highlight the novelty and contributions of the study
- Give an overview of the paper’s structure
The research paper introduction can vary in size and structure depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or is a review paper. Some research paper introduction examples are only half a page while others are a few pages long. In many cases, the introduction will be shorter than all of the other sections of your paper; its length depends on the size of your paper as a whole.
- Break through writer’s block. Write your research paper introduction with Paperpal Copilot
Table of Contents
What is the introduction for a research paper, why is the introduction important in a research paper, craft a compelling introduction section with paperpal. try now, 1. introduce the research topic:, 2. determine a research niche:, 3. place your research within the research niche:, craft accurate research paper introductions with paperpal. start writing now, frequently asked questions on research paper introduction, key points to remember.
The introduction in a research paper is placed at the beginning to guide the reader from a broad subject area to the specific topic that your research addresses. They present the following information to the reader
- Scope: The topic covered in the research paper
- Context: Background of your topic
- Importance: Why your research matters in that particular area of research and the industry problem that can be targeted
The research paper introduction conveys a lot of information and can be considered an essential roadmap for the rest of your paper. A good introduction for a research paper is important for the following reasons:
- It stimulates your reader’s interest: A good introduction section can make your readers want to read your paper by capturing their interest. It informs the reader what they are going to learn and helps determine if the topic is of interest to them.
- It helps the reader understand the research background: Without a clear introduction, your readers may feel confused and even struggle when reading your paper. A good research paper introduction will prepare them for the in-depth research to come. It provides you the opportunity to engage with the readers and demonstrate your knowledge and authority on the specific topic.
- It explains why your research paper is worth reading: Your introduction can convey a lot of information to your readers. It introduces the topic, why the topic is important, and how you plan to proceed with your research.
- It helps guide the reader through the rest of the paper: The research paper introduction gives the reader a sense of the nature of the information that will support your arguments and the general organization of the paragraphs that will follow. It offers an overview of what to expect when reading the main body of your paper.
What are the parts of introduction in the research?
A good research paper introduction section should comprise three main elements: 2
- What is known: This sets the stage for your research. It informs the readers of what is known on the subject.
- What is lacking: This is aimed at justifying the reason for carrying out your research. This could involve investigating a new concept or method or building upon previous research.
- What you aim to do: This part briefly states the objectives of your research and its major contributions. Your detailed hypothesis will also form a part of this section.
How to write a research paper introduction?
The first step in writing the research paper introduction is to inform the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening statement. The second step involves establishing the kinds of research that have been done and ending with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to address. Finally, the research paper introduction clarifies how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses. If your research involved testing hypotheses, these should be stated along with your research question. The hypothesis should be presented in the past tense since it will have been tested by the time you are writing the research paper introduction.
The following key points, with examples, can guide you when writing the research paper introduction section:
- Highlight the importance of the research field or topic
- Describe the background of the topic
- Present an overview of current research on the topic
Example: The inclusion of experiential and competency-based learning has benefitted electronics engineering education. Industry partnerships provide an excellent alternative for students wanting to engage in solving real-world challenges. Industry-academia participation has grown in recent years due to the need for skilled engineers with practical training and specialized expertise. However, from the educational perspective, many activities are needed to incorporate sustainable development goals into the university curricula and consolidate learning innovation in universities.
- Reveal a gap in existing research or oppose an existing assumption
- Formulate the research question
Example: There have been plausible efforts to integrate educational activities in higher education electronics engineering programs. However, very few studies have considered using educational research methods for performance evaluation of competency-based higher engineering education, with a focus on technical and or transversal skills. To remedy the current need for evaluating competencies in STEM fields and providing sustainable development goals in engineering education, in this study, a comparison was drawn between study groups without and with industry partners.
- State the purpose of your study
- Highlight the key characteristics of your study
- Describe important results
- Highlight the novelty of the study.
- Offer a brief overview of the structure of the paper.
Example: The study evaluates the main competency needed in the applied electronics course, which is a fundamental core subject for many electronics engineering undergraduate programs. We compared two groups, without and with an industrial partner, that offered real-world projects to solve during the semester. This comparison can help determine significant differences in both groups in terms of developing subject competency and achieving sustainable development goals.
Write a Research Paper Introduction in Minutes with Paperpal
Paperpal Copilot is a generative AI-powered academic writing assistant. It’s trained on millions of published scholarly articles and over 20 years of STM experience. Paperpal Copilot helps authors write better and faster with:
- Real-time writing suggestions
- In-depth checks for language and grammar correction
- Paraphrasing to add variety, ensure academic tone, and trim text to meet journal limits
With Paperpal Copilot, create a research paper introduction effortlessly. In this step-by-step guide, we’ll walk you through how Paperpal transforms your initial ideas into a polished and publication-ready introduction.
How to use Paperpal to write the Introduction section
Step 1: Sign up on Paperpal and click on the Copilot feature, under this choose Outlines > Research Article > Introduction
Step 2: Add your unstructured notes or initial draft, whether in English or another language, to Paperpal, which is to be used as the base for your content.
Step 3: Fill in the specifics, such as your field of study, brief description or details you want to include, which will help the AI generate the outline for your Introduction.
Step 4: Use this outline and sentence suggestions to develop your content, adding citations where needed and modifying it to align with your specific research focus.
Step 5: Turn to Paperpal’s granular language checks to refine your content, tailor it to reflect your personal writing style, and ensure it effectively conveys your message.
You can use the same process to develop each section of your article, and finally your research paper in half the time and without any of the stress.
The purpose of the research paper introduction is to introduce the reader to the problem definition, justify the need for the study, and describe the main theme of the study. The aim is to gain the reader’s attention by providing them with necessary background information and establishing the main purpose and direction of the research.
The length of the research paper introduction can vary across journals and disciplines. While there are no strict word limits for writing the research paper introduction, an ideal length would be one page, with a maximum of 400 words over 1-4 paragraphs. Generally, it is one of the shorter sections of the paper as the reader is assumed to have at least a reasonable knowledge about the topic. 2 For example, for a study evaluating the role of building design in ensuring fire safety, there is no need to discuss definitions and nature of fire in the introduction; you could start by commenting upon the existing practices for fire safety and how your study will add to the existing knowledge and practice.
When deciding what to include in the research paper introduction, the rest of the paper should also be considered. The aim is to introduce the reader smoothly to the topic and facilitate an easy read without much dependency on external sources. 3 Below is a list of elements you can include to prepare a research paper introduction outline and follow it when you are writing the research paper introduction. Topic introduction: This can include key definitions and a brief history of the topic. Research context and background: Offer the readers some general information and then narrow it down to specific aspects. Details of the research you conducted: A brief literature review can be included to support your arguments or line of thought. Rationale for the study: This establishes the relevance of your study and establishes its importance. Importance of your research: The main contributions are highlighted to help establish the novelty of your study Research hypothesis: Introduce your research question and propose an expected outcome. Organization of the paper: Include a short paragraph of 3-4 sentences that highlights your plan for the entire paper
Cite only works that are most relevant to your topic; as a general rule, you can include one to three. Note that readers want to see evidence of original thinking. So it is better to avoid using too many references as it does not leave much room for your personal standpoint to shine through. Citations in your research paper introduction support the key points, and the number of citations depend on the subject matter and the point discussed. If the research paper introduction is too long or overflowing with citations, it is better to cite a few review articles rather than the individual articles summarized in the review. A good point to remember when citing research papers in the introduction section is to include at least one-third of the references in the introduction.
The literature review plays a significant role in the research paper introduction section. A good literature review accomplishes the following: Introduces the topic – Establishes the study’s significance – Provides an overview of the relevant literature – Provides context for the study using literature – Identifies knowledge gaps However, remember to avoid making the following mistakes when writing a research paper introduction: Do not use studies from the literature review to aggressively support your research Avoid direct quoting Do not allow literature review to be the focus of this section. Instead, the literature review should only aid in setting a foundation for the manuscript.
Remember the following key points for writing a good research paper introduction: 4
- Avoid stuffing too much general information: Avoid including what an average reader would know and include only that information related to the problem being addressed in the research paper introduction. For example, when describing a comparative study of non-traditional methods for mechanical design optimization, information related to the traditional methods and differences between traditional and non-traditional methods would not be relevant. In this case, the introduction for the research paper should begin with the state-of-the-art non-traditional methods and methods to evaluate the efficiency of newly developed algorithms.
- Avoid packing too many references: Cite only the required works in your research paper introduction. The other works can be included in the discussion section to strengthen your findings.
- Avoid extensive criticism of previous studies: Avoid being overly critical of earlier studies while setting the rationale for your study. A better place for this would be the Discussion section, where you can highlight the advantages of your method.
- Avoid describing conclusions of the study: When writing a research paper introduction remember not to include the findings of your study. The aim is to let the readers know what question is being answered. The actual answer should only be given in the Results and Discussion section.
To summarize, the research paper introduction section should be brief yet informative. It should convince the reader the need to conduct the study and motivate him to read further. If you’re feeling stuck or unsure, choose trusted AI academic writing assistants like Paperpal to effortlessly craft your research paper introduction and other sections of your research article.
1. Jawaid, S. A., & Jawaid, M. (2019). How to write introduction and discussion. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 13(Suppl 1), S18.
2. Dewan, P., & Gupta, P. (2016). Writing the title, abstract and introduction: Looks matter!. Indian pediatrics, 53, 235-241.
3. Cetin, S., & Hackam, D. J. (2005). An approach to the writing of a scientific Manuscript1. Journal of Surgical Research, 128(2), 165-167.
4. Bavdekar, S. B. (2015). Writing introduction: Laying the foundations of a research paper. Journal of the Association of Physicians of India, 63(7), 44-6.
Paperpal is an AI writing assistant that help academics write better, faster with real-time suggestions for in-depth language and grammar correction. Trained on millions of research manuscripts enhanced by professional academic editors, Paperpal delivers human precision at machine speed.
Try it for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime , which unlocks unlimited access to premium features like academic translation, paraphrasing, contextual synonyms, consistency checks and more. It’s like always having a professional academic editor by your side! Go beyond limitations and experience the future of academic writing. Get Paperpal Prime now at just US$19 a month!
Related Reads:
- Scientific Writing Style Guides Explained
- 5 Reasons for Rejection After Peer Review
- Ethical Research Practices For Research with Human Subjects
- 8 Most Effective Ways to Increase Motivation for Thesis Writing
Practice vs. Practise: Learn the Difference
Academic paraphrasing: why paperpal’s rewrite should be your first choice , you may also like, self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how..., 6 tips for post-doc researchers to take their..., presenting research data effectively through tables and figures, ethics in science: importance, principles & guidelines , jenni ai review: top features, pricing, and alternatives, 8 most effective ways to increase motivation for..., how to make your thesis supervision work for..., publish or perish – understanding the importance of..., what next after manuscript rejection 5 options for..., how to revise and resubmit rejected manuscripts: a....
- Privacy Policy
- SignUp/Login
Home » Research Paper Introduction – Writing Guide and Examples
Research Paper Introduction – Writing Guide and Examples
Table of Contents
Research Paper Introduction
Research paper introduction is the first section of a research paper that provides an overview of the study, its purpose, and the research question (s) or hypothesis (es) being investigated. It typically includes background information about the topic, a review of previous research in the field, and a statement of the research objectives. The introduction is intended to provide the reader with a clear understanding of the research problem, why it is important, and how the study will contribute to existing knowledge in the field. It also sets the tone for the rest of the paper and helps to establish the author’s credibility and expertise on the subject.
How to Write Research Paper Introduction
Writing an introduction for a research paper can be challenging because it sets the tone for the entire paper. Here are some steps to follow to help you write an effective research paper introduction:
- Start with a hook : Begin your introduction with an attention-grabbing statement, a question, or a surprising fact that will make the reader interested in reading further.
- Provide background information: After the hook, provide background information on the topic. This information should give the reader a general idea of what the topic is about and why it is important.
- State the research problem: Clearly state the research problem or question that the paper addresses. This should be done in a concise and straightforward manner.
- State the research objectives: After stating the research problem, clearly state the research objectives. This will give the reader an idea of what the paper aims to achieve.
- Provide a brief overview of the paper: At the end of the introduction, provide a brief overview of the paper. This should include a summary of the main points that will be discussed in the paper.
- Revise and refine: Finally, revise and refine your introduction to ensure that it is clear, concise, and engaging.
Structure of Research Paper Introduction
The following is a typical structure for a research paper introduction:
- Background Information: This section provides an overview of the topic of the research paper, including relevant background information and any previous research that has been done on the topic. It helps to give the reader a sense of the context for the study.
- Problem Statement: This section identifies the specific problem or issue that the research paper is addressing. It should be clear and concise, and it should articulate the gap in knowledge that the study aims to fill.
- Research Question/Hypothesis : This section states the research question or hypothesis that the study aims to answer. It should be specific and focused, and it should clearly connect to the problem statement.
- Significance of the Study: This section explains why the research is important and what the potential implications of the study are. It should highlight the contribution that the research makes to the field.
- Methodology: This section describes the research methods that were used to conduct the study. It should be detailed enough to allow the reader to understand how the study was conducted and to evaluate the validity of the results.
- Organization of the Paper : This section provides a brief overview of the structure of the research paper. It should give the reader a sense of what to expect in each section of the paper.
Research Paper Introduction Examples
Research Paper Introduction Examples could be:
Example 1: In recent years, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly prevalent in various industries, including healthcare. AI algorithms are being developed to assist with medical diagnoses, treatment recommendations, and patient monitoring. However, as the use of AI in healthcare grows, ethical concerns regarding privacy, bias, and accountability have emerged. This paper aims to explore the ethical implications of AI in healthcare and propose recommendations for addressing these concerns.
Example 2: Climate change is one of the most pressing issues facing our planet today. The increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has resulted in rising temperatures, changing weather patterns, and other environmental impacts. In this paper, we will review the scientific evidence on climate change, discuss the potential consequences of inaction, and propose solutions for mitigating its effects.
Example 3: The rise of social media has transformed the way we communicate and interact with each other. While social media platforms offer many benefits, including increased connectivity and access to information, they also present numerous challenges. In this paper, we will examine the impact of social media on mental health, privacy, and democracy, and propose solutions for addressing these issues.
Example 4: The use of renewable energy sources has become increasingly important in the face of climate change and environmental degradation. While renewable energy technologies offer many benefits, including reduced greenhouse gas emissions and energy independence, they also present numerous challenges. In this paper, we will assess the current state of renewable energy technology, discuss the economic and political barriers to its adoption, and propose solutions for promoting the widespread use of renewable energy.
Purpose of Research Paper Introduction
The introduction section of a research paper serves several important purposes, including:
- Providing context: The introduction should give readers a general understanding of the topic, including its background, significance, and relevance to the field.
- Presenting the research question or problem: The introduction should clearly state the research question or problem that the paper aims to address. This helps readers understand the purpose of the study and what the author hopes to accomplish.
- Reviewing the literature: The introduction should summarize the current state of knowledge on the topic, highlighting the gaps and limitations in existing research. This shows readers why the study is important and necessary.
- Outlining the scope and objectives of the study: The introduction should describe the scope and objectives of the study, including what aspects of the topic will be covered, what data will be collected, and what methods will be used.
- Previewing the main findings and conclusions : The introduction should provide a brief overview of the main findings and conclusions that the study will present. This helps readers anticipate what they can expect to learn from the paper.
When to Write Research Paper Introduction
The introduction of a research paper is typically written after the research has been conducted and the data has been analyzed. This is because the introduction should provide an overview of the research problem, the purpose of the study, and the research questions or hypotheses that will be investigated.
Once you have a clear understanding of the research problem and the questions that you want to explore, you can begin to write the introduction. It’s important to keep in mind that the introduction should be written in a way that engages the reader and provides a clear rationale for the study. It should also provide context for the research by reviewing relevant literature and explaining how the study fits into the larger field of research.
Advantages of Research Paper Introduction
The introduction of a research paper has several advantages, including:
- Establishing the purpose of the research: The introduction provides an overview of the research problem, question, or hypothesis, and the objectives of the study. This helps to clarify the purpose of the research and provide a roadmap for the reader to follow.
- Providing background information: The introduction also provides background information on the topic, including a review of relevant literature and research. This helps the reader understand the context of the study and how it fits into the broader field of research.
- Demonstrating the significance of the research: The introduction also explains why the research is important and relevant. This helps the reader understand the value of the study and why it is worth reading.
- Setting expectations: The introduction sets the tone for the rest of the paper and prepares the reader for what is to come. This helps the reader understand what to expect and how to approach the paper.
- Grabbing the reader’s attention: A well-written introduction can grab the reader’s attention and make them interested in reading further. This is important because it can help to keep the reader engaged and motivated to read the rest of the paper.
- Creating a strong first impression: The introduction is the first part of the research paper that the reader will see, and it can create a strong first impression. A well-written introduction can make the reader more likely to take the research seriously and view it as credible.
- Establishing the author’s credibility: The introduction can also establish the author’s credibility as a researcher. By providing a clear and thorough overview of the research problem and relevant literature, the author can demonstrate their expertise and knowledge in the field.
- Providing a structure for the paper: The introduction can also provide a structure for the rest of the paper. By outlining the main sections and sub-sections of the paper, the introduction can help the reader navigate the paper and find the information they are looking for.
About the author
Muhammad Hassan
Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer
You may also like
Research Paper Conclusion – Writing Guide and...
Appendices – Writing Guide, Types and Examples
How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...
Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...
Scope of the Research – Writing Guide and...
Research Contribution – Thesis Guide
- PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
- EDIT Edit this Article
- EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
- Browse Articles
- Learn Something New
- Quizzes Hot
- This Or That Game New
- Train Your Brain
- Explore More
- Support wikiHow
- About wikiHow
- Log in / Sign up
- Education and Communications
- College University and Postgraduate
- Academic Writing
- Research Papers
How to Write a Research Introduction
Last Updated: December 6, 2023 Fact Checked
This article was co-authored by Megan Morgan, PhD . Megan Morgan is a Graduate Program Academic Advisor in the School of Public & International Affairs at the University of Georgia. She earned her PhD in English from the University of Georgia in 2015. There are 7 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 2,647,373 times.
The introduction to a research paper can be the most challenging part of the paper to write. The length of the introduction will vary depending on the type of research paper you are writing. An introduction should announce your topic, provide context and a rationale for your work, before stating your research questions and hypothesis. Well-written introductions set the tone for the paper, catch the reader's interest, and communicate the hypothesis or thesis statement.
Introducing the Topic of the Paper
- In scientific papers this is sometimes known as an "inverted triangle", where you start with the broadest material at the start, before zooming in on the specifics. [2] X Research source
- The sentence "Throughout the 20th century, our views of life on other planets have drastically changed" introduces a topic, but does so in broad terms.
- It provides the reader with an indication of the content of the essay and encourages them to read on.
- For example, if you were writing a paper about the behaviour of mice when exposed to a particular substance, you would include the word "mice", and the scientific name of the relevant compound in the first sentences.
- If you were writing a history paper about the impact of the First World War on gender relations in Britain, you should mention those key words in your first few lines.
- This is especially important if you are attempting to develop a new conceptualization that uses language and terminology your readers may be unfamiliar with.
- If you use an anecdote ensure that is short and highly relevant for your research. It has to function in the same way as an alternative opening, namely to announce the topic of your research paper to your reader.
- For example, if you were writing a sociology paper about re-offending rates among young offenders, you could include a brief story of one person whose story reflects and introduces your topic.
- This kind of approach is generally not appropriate for the introduction to a natural or physical sciences research paper where the writing conventions are different.
Establishing the Context for Your Paper
- It is important to be concise in the introduction, so provide an overview on recent developments in the primary research rather than a lengthy discussion.
- You can follow the "inverted triangle" principle to focus in from the broader themes to those to which you are making a direct contribution with your paper.
- A strong literature review presents important background information to your own research and indicates the importance of the field.
- By making clear reference to existing work you can demonstrate explicitly the specific contribution you are making to move the field forward.
- You can identify a gap in the existing scholarship and explain how you are addressing it and moving understanding forward.
- For example, if you are writing a scientific paper you could stress the merits of the experimental approach or models you have used.
- Stress what is novel in your research and the significance of your new approach, but don't give too much detail in the introduction.
- A stated rationale could be something like: "the study evaluates the previously unknown anti-inflammatory effects of a topical compound in order to evaluate its potential clinical uses".
Specifying Your Research Questions and Hypothesis
- The research question or questions generally come towards the end of the introduction, and should be concise and closely focused.
- The research question might recall some of the key words established in the first few sentences and the title of your paper.
- An example of a research question could be "what were the consequences of the North American Free Trade Agreement on the Mexican export economy?"
- This could be honed further to be specific by referring to a particular element of the Free Trade Agreement and the impact on a particular industry in Mexico, such as clothing manufacture.
- A good research question should shape a problem into a testable hypothesis.
- If possible try to avoid using the word "hypothesis" and rather make this implicit in your writing. This can make your writing appear less formulaic.
- In a scientific paper, giving a clear one-sentence overview of your results and their relation to your hypothesis makes the information clear and accessible. [10] X Trustworthy Source PubMed Central Journal archive from the U.S. National Institutes of Health Go to source
- An example of a hypothesis could be "mice deprived of food for the duration of the study were expected to become more lethargic than those fed normally".
- This is not always necessary and you should pay attention to the writing conventions in your discipline.
- In a natural sciences paper, for example, there is a fairly rigid structure which you will be following.
- A humanities or social science paper will most likely present more opportunities to deviate in how you structure your paper.
Research Introduction Help
Community Q&A
- Use your research papers' outline to help you decide what information to include when writing an introduction. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 1
- Consider drafting your introduction after you have already completed the rest of your research paper. Writing introductions last can help ensure that you don't leave out any major points. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
- Avoid emotional or sensational introductions; these can create distrust in the reader. Thanks Helpful 50 Not Helpful 12
- Generally avoid using personal pronouns in your introduction, such as "I," "me," "we," "us," "my," "mine," or "our." Thanks Helpful 31 Not Helpful 7
- Don't overwhelm the reader with an over-abundance of information. Keep the introduction as concise as possible by saving specific details for the body of your paper. Thanks Helpful 24 Not Helpful 14
You Might Also Like
- ↑ https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803&p=185916
- ↑ https://www.aresearchguide.com/inverted-pyramid-structure-in-writing.html
- ↑ https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/introduction
- ↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/PlanResearchPaper.html
- ↑ https://dept.writing.wisc.edu/wac/writing-an-introduction-for-a-scientific-paper/
- ↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/assignments/planresearchpaper/
- ↑ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3178846/
About This Article
To introduce your research paper, use the first 1-2 sentences to describe your general topic, such as “women in World War I.” Include and define keywords, such as “gender relations,” to show your reader where you’re going. Mention previous research into the topic with a phrase like, “Others have studied…”, then transition into what your contribution will be and why it’s necessary. Finally, state the questions that your paper will address and propose your “answer” to them as your thesis statement. For more information from our English Ph.D. co-author about how to craft a strong hypothesis and thesis, keep reading! Did this summary help you? Yes No
- Send fan mail to authors
Reader Success Stories
Abdulrahman Omar
Oct 5, 2018
Did this article help you?
May 9, 2021
Lavanya Gopakumar
Oct 1, 2016
Dengkai Zhang
May 14, 2018
Leslie Mae Cansana
Sep 22, 2016
Featured Articles
Trending Articles
Watch Articles
- Terms of Use
- Privacy Policy
- Do Not Sell or Share My Info
- Not Selling Info
wikiHow Tech Help Pro:
Develop the tech skills you need for work and life
Introductions
What this handout is about.
This handout will explain the functions of introductions, offer strategies for creating effective introductions, and provide some examples of less effective introductions to avoid.
The role of introductions
Introductions and conclusions can be the most difficult parts of papers to write. Usually when you sit down to respond to an assignment, you have at least some sense of what you want to say in the body of your paper. You might have chosen a few examples you want to use or have an idea that will help you answer the main question of your assignment; these sections, therefore, may not be as hard to write. And it’s fine to write them first! But in your final draft, these middle parts of the paper can’t just come out of thin air; they need to be introduced and concluded in a way that makes sense to your reader.
Your introduction and conclusion act as bridges that transport your readers from their own lives into the “place” of your analysis. If your readers pick up your paper about education in the autobiography of Frederick Douglass, for example, they need a transition to help them leave behind the world of Chapel Hill, television, e-mail, and The Daily Tar Heel and to help them temporarily enter the world of nineteenth-century American slavery. By providing an introduction that helps your readers make a transition between their own world and the issues you will be writing about, you give your readers the tools they need to get into your topic and care about what you are saying. Similarly, once you’ve hooked your readers with the introduction and offered evidence to prove your thesis, your conclusion can provide a bridge to help your readers make the transition back to their daily lives. (See our handout on conclusions .)
Note that what constitutes a good introduction may vary widely based on the kind of paper you are writing and the academic discipline in which you are writing it. If you are uncertain what kind of introduction is expected, ask your instructor.
Why bother writing a good introduction?
You never get a second chance to make a first impression. The opening paragraph of your paper will provide your readers with their initial impressions of your argument, your writing style, and the overall quality of your work. A vague, disorganized, error-filled, off-the-wall, or boring introduction will probably create a negative impression. On the other hand, a concise, engaging, and well-written introduction will start your readers off thinking highly of you, your analytical skills, your writing, and your paper.
Your introduction is an important road map for the rest of your paper. Your introduction conveys a lot of information to your readers. You can let them know what your topic is, why it is important, and how you plan to proceed with your discussion. In many academic disciplines, your introduction should contain a thesis that will assert your main argument. Your introduction should also give the reader a sense of the kinds of information you will use to make that argument and the general organization of the paragraphs and pages that will follow. After reading your introduction, your readers should not have any major surprises in store when they read the main body of your paper.
Ideally, your introduction will make your readers want to read your paper. The introduction should capture your readers’ interest, making them want to read the rest of your paper. Opening with a compelling story, an interesting question, or a vivid example can get your readers to see why your topic matters and serve as an invitation for them to join you for an engaging intellectual conversation (remember, though, that these strategies may not be suitable for all papers and disciplines).
Strategies for writing an effective introduction
Start by thinking about the question (or questions) you are trying to answer. Your entire essay will be a response to this question, and your introduction is the first step toward that end. Your direct answer to the assigned question will be your thesis, and your thesis will likely be included in your introduction, so it is a good idea to use the question as a jumping off point. Imagine that you are assigned the following question:
Drawing on the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass , discuss the relationship between education and slavery in 19th-century America. Consider the following: How did white control of education reinforce slavery? How did Douglass and other enslaved African Americans view education while they endured slavery? And what role did education play in the acquisition of freedom? Most importantly, consider the degree to which education was or was not a major force for social change with regard to slavery.
You will probably refer back to your assignment extensively as you prepare your complete essay, and the prompt itself can also give you some clues about how to approach the introduction. Notice that it starts with a broad statement and then narrows to focus on specific questions from the book. One strategy might be to use a similar model in your own introduction—start off with a big picture sentence or two and then focus in on the details of your argument about Douglass. Of course, a different approach could also be very successful, but looking at the way the professor set up the question can sometimes give you some ideas for how you might answer it. (See our handout on understanding assignments for additional information on the hidden clues in assignments.)
Decide how general or broad your opening should be. Keep in mind that even a “big picture” opening needs to be clearly related to your topic; an opening sentence that said “Human beings, more than any other creatures on earth, are capable of learning” would be too broad for our sample assignment about slavery and education. If you have ever used Google Maps or similar programs, that experience can provide a helpful way of thinking about how broad your opening should be. Imagine that you’re researching Chapel Hill. If what you want to find out is whether Chapel Hill is at roughly the same latitude as Rome, it might make sense to hit that little “minus” sign on the online map until it has zoomed all the way out and you can see the whole globe. If you’re trying to figure out how to get from Chapel Hill to Wrightsville Beach, it might make more sense to zoom in to the level where you can see most of North Carolina (but not the rest of the world, or even the rest of the United States). And if you are looking for the intersection of Ridge Road and Manning Drive so that you can find the Writing Center’s main office, you may need to zoom all the way in. The question you are asking determines how “broad” your view should be. In the sample assignment above, the questions are probably at the “state” or “city” level of generality. When writing, you need to place your ideas in context—but that context doesn’t generally have to be as big as the whole galaxy!
Try writing your introduction last. You may think that you have to write your introduction first, but that isn’t necessarily true, and it isn’t always the most effective way to craft a good introduction. You may find that you don’t know precisely what you are going to argue at the beginning of the writing process. It is perfectly fine to start out thinking that you want to argue a particular point but wind up arguing something slightly or even dramatically different by the time you’ve written most of the paper. The writing process can be an important way to organize your ideas, think through complicated issues, refine your thoughts, and develop a sophisticated argument. However, an introduction written at the beginning of that discovery process will not necessarily reflect what you wind up with at the end. You will need to revise your paper to make sure that the introduction, all of the evidence, and the conclusion reflect the argument you intend. Sometimes it’s easiest to just write up all of your evidence first and then write the introduction last—that way you can be sure that the introduction will match the body of the paper.
Don’t be afraid to write a tentative introduction first and then change it later. Some people find that they need to write some kind of introduction in order to get the writing process started. That’s fine, but if you are one of those people, be sure to return to your initial introduction later and rewrite if necessary.
Open with something that will draw readers in. Consider these options (remembering that they may not be suitable for all kinds of papers):
- an intriguing example —for example, Douglass writes about a mistress who initially teaches him but then ceases her instruction as she learns more about slavery.
- a provocative quotation that is closely related to your argument —for example, Douglass writes that “education and slavery were incompatible with each other.” (Quotes from famous people, inspirational quotes, etc. may not work well for an academic paper; in this example, the quote is from the author himself.)
- a puzzling scenario —for example, Frederick Douglass says of slaves that “[N]othing has been left undone to cripple their intellects, darken their minds, debase their moral nature, obliterate all traces of their relationship to mankind; and yet how wonderfully they have sustained the mighty load of a most frightful bondage, under which they have been groaning for centuries!” Douglass clearly asserts that slave owners went to great lengths to destroy the mental capacities of slaves, yet his own life story proves that these efforts could be unsuccessful.
- a vivid and perhaps unexpected anecdote —for example, “Learning about slavery in the American history course at Frederick Douglass High School, students studied the work slaves did, the impact of slavery on their families, and the rules that governed their lives. We didn’t discuss education, however, until one student, Mary, raised her hand and asked, ‘But when did they go to school?’ That modern high school students could not conceive of an American childhood devoid of formal education speaks volumes about the centrality of education to American youth today and also suggests the significance of the deprivation of education in past generations.”
- a thought-provoking question —for example, given all of the freedoms that were denied enslaved individuals in the American South, why does Frederick Douglass focus his attentions so squarely on education and literacy?
Pay special attention to your first sentence. Start off on the right foot with your readers by making sure that the first sentence actually says something useful and that it does so in an interesting and polished way.
How to evaluate your introduction draft
Ask a friend to read your introduction and then tell you what he or she expects the paper will discuss, what kinds of evidence the paper will use, and what the tone of the paper will be. If your friend is able to predict the rest of your paper accurately, you probably have a good introduction.
Five kinds of less effective introductions
1. The placeholder introduction. When you don’t have much to say on a given topic, it is easy to create this kind of introduction. Essentially, this kind of weaker introduction contains several sentences that are vague and don’t really say much. They exist just to take up the “introduction space” in your paper. If you had something more effective to say, you would probably say it, but in the meantime this paragraph is just a place holder.
Example: Slavery was one of the greatest tragedies in American history. There were many different aspects of slavery. Each created different kinds of problems for enslaved people.
2. The restated question introduction. Restating the question can sometimes be an effective strategy, but it can be easy to stop at JUST restating the question instead of offering a more specific, interesting introduction to your paper. The professor or teaching assistant wrote your question and will be reading many essays in response to it—he or she does not need to read a whole paragraph that simply restates the question.
Example: The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass discusses the relationship between education and slavery in 19th century America, showing how white control of education reinforced slavery and how Douglass and other enslaved African Americans viewed education while they endured. Moreover, the book discusses the role that education played in the acquisition of freedom. Education was a major force for social change with regard to slavery.
3. The Webster’s Dictionary introduction. This introduction begins by giving the dictionary definition of one or more of the words in the assigned question. Anyone can look a word up in the dictionary and copy down what Webster says. If you want to open with a discussion of an important term, it may be far more interesting for you (and your reader) if you develop your own definition of the term in the specific context of your class and assignment. You may also be able to use a definition from one of the sources you’ve been reading for class. Also recognize that the dictionary is also not a particularly authoritative work—it doesn’t take into account the context of your course and doesn’t offer particularly detailed information. If you feel that you must seek out an authority, try to find one that is very relevant and specific. Perhaps a quotation from a source reading might prove better? Dictionary introductions are also ineffective simply because they are so overused. Instructors may see a great many papers that begin in this way, greatly decreasing the dramatic impact that any one of those papers will have.
Example: Webster’s dictionary defines slavery as “the state of being a slave,” as “the practice of owning slaves,” and as “a condition of hard work and subjection.”
4. The “dawn of man” introduction. This kind of introduction generally makes broad, sweeping statements about the relevance of this topic since the beginning of time, throughout the world, etc. It is usually very general (similar to the placeholder introduction) and fails to connect to the thesis. It may employ cliches—the phrases “the dawn of man” and “throughout human history” are examples, and it’s hard to imagine a time when starting with one of these would work. Instructors often find them extremely annoying.
Example: Since the dawn of man, slavery has been a problem in human history.
5. The book report introduction. This introduction is what you had to do for your elementary school book reports. It gives the name and author of the book you are writing about, tells what the book is about, and offers other basic facts about the book. You might resort to this sort of introduction when you are trying to fill space because it’s a familiar, comfortable format. It is ineffective because it offers details that your reader probably already knows and that are irrelevant to the thesis.
Example: Frederick Douglass wrote his autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave , in the 1840s. It was published in 1986 by Penguin Books. In it, he tells the story of his life.
And now for the conclusion…
Writing an effective introduction can be tough. Try playing around with several different options and choose the one that ends up sounding best to you!
Just as your introduction helps readers make the transition to your topic, your conclusion needs to help them return to their daily lives–but with a lasting sense of how what they have just read is useful or meaningful. Check out our handout on conclusions for tips on ending your paper as effectively as you began it!
Works consulted
We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.
Douglass, Frederick. 1995. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Written by Himself . New York: Dover.
You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Make a Gift
- USC Libraries
- Research Guides
Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper
- 4. The Introduction
- Purpose of Guide
- Design Flaws to Avoid
- Independent and Dependent Variables
- Glossary of Research Terms
- Reading Research Effectively
- Narrowing a Topic Idea
- Broadening a Topic Idea
- Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
- Academic Writing Style
- Choosing a Title
- Making an Outline
- Paragraph Development
- Research Process Video Series
- Executive Summary
- The C.A.R.S. Model
- Background Information
- The Research Problem/Question
- Theoretical Framework
- Citation Tracking
- Content Alert Services
- Evaluating Sources
- Primary Sources
- Secondary Sources
- Tiertiary Sources
- Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
- Qualitative Methods
- Quantitative Methods
- Insiderness
- Using Non-Textual Elements
- Limitations of the Study
- Common Grammar Mistakes
- Writing Concisely
- Avoiding Plagiarism
- Footnotes or Endnotes?
- Further Readings
- Generative AI and Writing
- USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
- Bibliography
The introduction leads the reader from a general subject area to a particular topic of inquiry. It establishes the scope, context, and significance of the research being conducted by summarizing current understanding and background information about the topic, stating the purpose of the work in the form of the research problem supported by a hypothesis or a set of questions, explaining briefly the methodological approach used to examine the research problem, highlighting the potential outcomes your study can reveal, and outlining the remaining structure and organization of the paper.
Key Elements of the Research Proposal. Prepared under the direction of the Superintendent and by the 2010 Curriculum Design and Writing Team. Baltimore County Public Schools.
Importance of a Good Introduction
Think of the introduction as a mental road map that must answer for the reader these four questions:
- What was I studying?
- Why was this topic important to investigate?
- What did we know about this topic before I did this study?
- How will this study advance new knowledge or new ways of understanding?
According to Reyes, there are three overarching goals of a good introduction: 1) ensure that you summarize prior studies about the topic in a manner that lays a foundation for understanding the research problem; 2) explain how your study specifically addresses gaps in the literature, insufficient consideration of the topic, or other deficiency in the literature; and, 3) note the broader theoretical, empirical, and/or policy contributions and implications of your research.
A well-written introduction is important because, quite simply, you never get a second chance to make a good first impression. The opening paragraphs of your paper will provide your readers with their initial impressions about the logic of your argument, your writing style, the overall quality of your research, and, ultimately, the validity of your findings and conclusions. A vague, disorganized, or error-filled introduction will create a negative impression, whereas, a concise, engaging, and well-written introduction will lead your readers to think highly of your analytical skills, your writing style, and your research approach. All introductions should conclude with a brief paragraph that describes the organization of the rest of the paper.
Hirano, Eliana. “Research Article Introductions in English for Specific Purposes: A Comparison between Brazilian, Portuguese, and English.” English for Specific Purposes 28 (October 2009): 240-250; Samraj, B. “Introductions in Research Articles: Variations Across Disciplines.” English for Specific Purposes 21 (2002): 1–17; Introductions. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; “Writing Introductions.” In Good Essay Writing: A Social Sciences Guide. Peter Redman. 4th edition. (London: Sage, 2011), pp. 63-70; Reyes, Victoria. Demystifying the Journal Article. Inside Higher Education.
Structure and Writing Style
I. Structure and Approach
The introduction is the broad beginning of the paper that answers three important questions for the reader:
- What is this?
- Why should I read it?
- What do you want me to think about / consider doing / react to?
Think of the structure of the introduction as an inverted triangle of information that lays a foundation for understanding the research problem. Organize the information so as to present the more general aspects of the topic early in the introduction, then narrow your analysis to more specific topical information that provides context, finally arriving at your research problem and the rationale for studying it [often written as a series of key questions to be addressed or framed as a hypothesis or set of assumptions to be tested] and, whenever possible, a description of the potential outcomes your study can reveal.
These are general phases associated with writing an introduction: 1. Establish an area to research by:
- Highlighting the importance of the topic, and/or
- Making general statements about the topic, and/or
- Presenting an overview on current research on the subject.
2. Identify a research niche by:
- Opposing an existing assumption, and/or
- Revealing a gap in existing research, and/or
- Formulating a research question or problem, and/or
- Continuing a disciplinary tradition.
3. Place your research within the research niche by:
- Stating the intent of your study,
- Outlining the key characteristics of your study,
- Describing important results, and
- Giving a brief overview of the structure of the paper.
NOTE: It is often useful to review the introduction late in the writing process. This is appropriate because outcomes are unknown until you've completed the study. After you complete writing the body of the paper, go back and review introductory descriptions of the structure of the paper, the method of data gathering, the reporting and analysis of results, and the conclusion. Reviewing and, if necessary, rewriting the introduction ensures that it correctly matches the overall structure of your final paper.
II. Delimitations of the Study
Delimitations refer to those characteristics that limit the scope and define the conceptual boundaries of your research . This is determined by the conscious exclusionary and inclusionary decisions you make about how to investigate the research problem. In other words, not only should you tell the reader what it is you are studying and why, but you must also acknowledge why you rejected alternative approaches that could have been used to examine the topic.
Obviously, the first limiting step was the choice of research problem itself. However, implicit are other, related problems that could have been chosen but were rejected. These should be noted in the conclusion of your introduction. For example, a delimitating statement could read, "Although many factors can be understood to impact the likelihood young people will vote, this study will focus on socioeconomic factors related to the need to work full-time while in school." The point is not to document every possible delimiting factor, but to highlight why previously researched issues related to the topic were not addressed.
Examples of delimitating choices would be:
- The key aims and objectives of your study,
- The research questions that you address,
- The variables of interest [i.e., the various factors and features of the phenomenon being studied],
- The method(s) of investigation,
- The time period your study covers, and
- Any relevant alternative theoretical frameworks that could have been adopted.
Review each of these decisions. Not only do you clearly establish what you intend to accomplish in your research, but you should also include a declaration of what the study does not intend to cover. In the latter case, your exclusionary decisions should be based upon criteria understood as, "not interesting"; "not directly relevant"; “too problematic because..."; "not feasible," and the like. Make this reasoning explicit!
NOTE: Delimitations refer to the initial choices made about the broader, overall design of your study and should not be confused with documenting the limitations of your study discovered after the research has been completed.
ANOTHER NOTE : Do not view delimitating statements as admitting to an inherent failing or shortcoming in your research. They are an accepted element of academic writing intended to keep the reader focused on the research problem by explicitly defining the conceptual boundaries and scope of your study. It addresses any critical questions in the reader's mind of, "Why the hell didn't the author examine this?"
III. The Narrative Flow
Issues to keep in mind that will help the narrative flow in your introduction :
- Your introduction should clearly identify the subject area of interest . A simple strategy to follow is to use key words from your title in the first few sentences of the introduction. This will help focus the introduction on the topic at the appropriate level and ensures that you get to the subject matter quickly without losing focus, or discussing information that is too general.
- Establish context by providing a brief and balanced review of the pertinent published literature that is available on the subject. The key is to summarize for the reader what is known about the specific research problem before you did your analysis. This part of your introduction should not represent a comprehensive literature review--that comes next. It consists of a general review of the important, foundational research literature [with citations] that establishes a foundation for understanding key elements of the research problem. See the drop-down menu under this tab for " Background Information " regarding types of contexts.
- Clearly state the hypothesis that you investigated . When you are first learning to write in this format it is okay, and actually preferable, to use a past statement like, "The purpose of this study was to...." or "We investigated three possible mechanisms to explain the...."
- Why did you choose this kind of research study or design? Provide a clear statement of the rationale for your approach to the problem studied. This will usually follow your statement of purpose in the last paragraph of the introduction.
IV. Engaging the Reader
A research problem in the social sciences can come across as dry and uninteresting to anyone unfamiliar with the topic . Therefore, one of the goals of your introduction is to make readers want to read your paper. Here are several strategies you can use to grab the reader's attention:
- Open with a compelling story . Almost all research problems in the social sciences, no matter how obscure or esoteric , are really about the lives of people. Telling a story that humanizes an issue can help illuminate the significance of the problem and help the reader empathize with those affected by the condition being studied.
- Include a strong quotation or a vivid, perhaps unexpected, anecdote . During your review of the literature, make note of any quotes or anecdotes that grab your attention because they can used in your introduction to highlight the research problem in a captivating way.
- Pose a provocative or thought-provoking question . Your research problem should be framed by a set of questions to be addressed or hypotheses to be tested. However, a provocative question can be presented in the beginning of your introduction that challenges an existing assumption or compels the reader to consider an alternative viewpoint that helps establish the significance of your study.
- Describe a puzzling scenario or incongruity . This involves highlighting an interesting quandary concerning the research problem or describing contradictory findings from prior studies about a topic. Posing what is essentially an unresolved intellectual riddle about the problem can engage the reader's interest in the study.
- Cite a stirring example or case study that illustrates why the research problem is important . Draw upon the findings of others to demonstrate the significance of the problem and to describe how your study builds upon or offers alternatives ways of investigating this prior research.
NOTE: It is important that you choose only one of the suggested strategies for engaging your readers. This avoids giving an impression that your paper is more flash than substance and does not distract from the substance of your study.
Freedman, Leora and Jerry Plotnick. Introductions and Conclusions. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Introduction. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College; Introductions. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Introductions. The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Introductions, Body Paragraphs, and Conclusions for an Argument Paper. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; “Writing Introductions.” In Good Essay Writing: A Social Sciences Guide . Peter Redman. 4th edition. (London: Sage, 2011), pp. 63-70; Resources for Writers: Introduction Strategies. Program in Writing and Humanistic Studies. Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Sharpling, Gerald. Writing an Introduction. Centre for Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick; Samraj, B. “Introductions in Research Articles: Variations Across Disciplines.” English for Specific Purposes 21 (2002): 1–17; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks . 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004 ; Writing Your Introduction. Department of English Writing Guide. George Mason University.
Writing Tip
Avoid the "Dictionary" Introduction
Giving the dictionary definition of words related to the research problem may appear appropriate because it is important to define specific terminology that readers may be unfamiliar with. However, anyone can look a word up in the dictionary and a general dictionary is not a particularly authoritative source because it doesn't take into account the context of your topic and doesn't offer particularly detailed information. Also, placed in the context of a particular discipline, a term or concept may have a different meaning than what is found in a general dictionary. If you feel that you must seek out an authoritative definition, use a subject specific dictionary or encyclopedia [e.g., if you are a sociology student, search for dictionaries of sociology]. A good database for obtaining definitive definitions of concepts or terms is Credo Reference .
Saba, Robert. The College Research Paper. Florida International University; Introductions. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina.
Another Writing Tip
When Do I Begin?
A common question asked at the start of any paper is, "Where should I begin?" An equally important question to ask yourself is, "When do I begin?" Research problems in the social sciences rarely rest in isolation from history. Therefore, it is important to lay a foundation for understanding the historical context underpinning the research problem. However, this information should be brief and succinct and begin at a point in time that illustrates the study's overall importance. For example, a study that investigates coffee cultivation and export in West Africa as a key stimulus for local economic growth needs to describe the beginning of exporting coffee in the region and establishing why economic growth is important. You do not need to give a long historical explanation about coffee exports in Africa. If a research problem requires a substantial exploration of the historical context, do this in the literature review section. In your introduction, make note of this as part of the "roadmap" [see below] that you use to describe the organization of your paper.
Introductions. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; “Writing Introductions.” In Good Essay Writing: A Social Sciences Guide . Peter Redman. 4th edition. (London: Sage, 2011), pp. 63-70.
Yet Another Writing Tip
Always End with a Roadmap
The final paragraph or sentences of your introduction should forecast your main arguments and conclusions and provide a brief description of the rest of the paper [the "roadmap"] that let's the reader know where you are going and what to expect. A roadmap is important because it helps the reader place the research problem within the context of their own perspectives about the topic. In addition, concluding your introduction with an explicit roadmap tells the reader that you have a clear understanding of the structural purpose of your paper. In this way, the roadmap acts as a type of promise to yourself and to your readers that you will follow a consistent and coherent approach to addressing the topic of inquiry. Refer to it often to help keep your writing focused and organized.
Cassuto, Leonard. “On the Dissertation: How to Write the Introduction.” The Chronicle of Higher Education , May 28, 2018; Radich, Michael. A Student's Guide to Writing in East Asian Studies . (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Writing n. d.), pp. 35-37.
- << Previous: Executive Summary
- Next: The C.A.R.S. Model >>
- Last Updated: Feb 8, 2024 1:57 PM
- URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide
- Resources Home 🏠
- Try SciSpace Copilot
- Search research papers
- Add Copilot Extension
- Try AI Detector
- Try Paraphraser
- Try Citation Generator
- April Papers
- June Papers
- July Papers
How to Write an Introduction for a Research Paper
Table of Contents
Writing an introduction for a research paper is a critical element of your paper, but it can seem challenging to encapsulate enormous amount of information into a concise form. The introduction of your research paper sets the tone for your research and provides the context for your study. In this article, we will guide you through the process of writing an effective introduction that grabs the reader's attention and captures the essence of your research paper.
Understanding the Purpose of a Research Paper Introduction
The introduction acts as a road map for your research paper, guiding the reader through the main ideas and arguments. The purpose of the introduction is to present your research topic to the readers and provide a rationale for why your study is relevant. It helps the reader locate your research and its relevance in the broader field of related scientific explorations. Additionally, the introduction should inform the reader about the objectives and scope of your study, giving them an overview of what to expect in the paper. By including a comprehensive introduction, you establish your credibility as an author and convince the reader that your research is worth their time and attention.
Key Elements to Include in Your Introduction
When writing your research paper introduction, there are several key elements you should include to ensure it is comprehensive and informative.
- A hook or attention-grabbing statement to capture the reader's interest. It can be a thought-provoking question, a surprising statistic, or a compelling anecdote that relates to your research topic.
- A brief overview of the research topic and its significance. By highlighting the gap in existing knowledge or the problem your research aims to address, you create a compelling case for the relevance of your study.
- A clear research question or problem statement. This serves as the foundation of your research and guides the reader in understanding the unique focus of your study. It should be concise, specific, and clearly articulated.
- An outline of the paper's structure and main arguments, to help the readers navigate through the paper with ease.
Preparing to Write Your Introduction
Before diving into writing your introduction, it is essential to prepare adequately. This involves 3 important steps:
- Conducting Preliminary Research: Immerse yourself in the existing literature to develop a clear research question and position your study within the academic discourse.
- Identifying Your Thesis Statement: Define a specific, focused, and debatable thesis statement, serving as a roadmap for your paper.
- Considering Broader Context: Reflect on the significance of your research within your field, understanding its potential impact and contribution.
By engaging in these preparatory steps, you can ensure that your introduction is well-informed, focused, and sets the stage for a compelling research paper.
Structuring Your Introduction
Now that you have prepared yourself to tackle the introduction, it's time to structure it effectively. A well-structured introduction will engage the reader from the beginning and provide a logical flow to your research paper.
Starting with a Hook
Begin your introduction with an attention-grabbing hook that captivates the reader's interest. This hook serves as a way to make your introduction more engaging and compelling. For example, if you are writing a research paper on the impact of climate change on biodiversity, you could start your introduction with a statistic about the number of species that have gone extinct due to climate change. This will immediately grab the reader's attention and make them realize the urgency and importance of the topic.
Introducing Your Topic
Provide a brief overview, which should give the reader a general understanding of the subject matter and its significance. Explain the importance of the topic and its relevance to the field. This will help the reader understand why your research is significant and why they should continue reading. Continuing with the example of climate change and biodiversity, you could explain how climate change is one of the greatest threats to global biodiversity, how it affects ecosystems, and the potential consequences for both wildlife and human populations. By providing this context, you are setting the stage for the rest of your research paper and helping the reader understand the importance of your study.
Presenting Your Thesis Statement
The thesis statement should directly address your research question and provide a preview of the main arguments or findings discussed in your paper. Make sure your thesis statement is clear, concise, and well-supported by the evidence you will present in your research paper. By presenting a strong and focused thesis statement, you are providing the reader with the information they could anticipate in your research paper. This will help them understand the purpose and scope of your study and will make them more inclined to continue reading.
Writing Techniques for an Effective Introduction
When crafting an introduction, it is crucial to pay attention to the finer details that can elevate your writing to the next level. By utilizing specific writing techniques, you can captivate your readers and draw them into your research journey.
Using Clear and Concise Language
One of the most important writing techniques to employ in your introduction is the use of clear and concise language. By choosing your words carefully, you can effectively convey your ideas to the reader. It is essential to avoid using jargon or complex terminology that may confuse or alienate your audience. Instead, focus on communicating your research in a straightforward manner to ensure that your introduction is accessible to both experts in your field and those who may be new to the topic. This approach allows you to engage a broader audience and make your research more inclusive.
Establishing the Relevance of Your Research
One way to establish the relevance of your research is by highlighting how it fills a gap in the existing literature. Explain how your study addresses a significant research question that has not been adequately explored. By doing this, you demonstrate that your research is not only unique but also contributes to the broader knowledge in your field. Furthermore, it is important to emphasize the potential impact of your research. Whether it is advancing scientific understanding, informing policy decisions, or improving practical applications, make it clear to the reader how your study can make a difference.
By employing these two writing techniques in your introduction, you can effectively engage your readers. Take your time to craft an introduction that is both informative and captivating, leaving your readers eager to delve deeper into your research.
Revising and Polishing Your Introduction
Once you have written your introduction, it is crucial to revise and polish it to ensure that it effectively sets the stage for your research paper.
Self-Editing Techniques
Review your introduction for clarity, coherence, and logical flow. Ensure each paragraph introduces a new idea or argument with smooth transitions.
Check for grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, and awkward sentence structures.
Ensure that your introduction aligns with the overall tone and style of your research paper.
Seeking Feedback for Improvement
Consider seeking feedback from peers, colleagues, or your instructor. They can provide valuable insights and suggestions for improving your introduction. Be open to constructive criticism and use it to refine your introduction and make it more compelling for the reader.
Writing an introduction for a research paper requires careful thought and planning. By understanding the purpose of the introduction, preparing adequately, structuring effectively, and employing writing techniques, you can create an engaging and informative introduction for your research. Remember to revise and polish your introduction to ensure that it accurately represents the main ideas and arguments in your research paper. With a well-crafted introduction, you will capture the reader's attention and keep them inclined to your paper.
Suggested Reads
ResearchGPT: A Custom GPT for Researchers and Scientists Best Academic Search Engines [2023] How To Humanize AI Text In Scientific Articles Elevate Your Writing Game With AI Grammar Checker Tools
You might also like
Top 8 Innovative Custom GPTs for Scientific Research
How SciSpace GPT Enhances Scholarly Writing
Analyzing Research Papers Made Simple with SciSpace GPT
Have a language expert improve your writing
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.
- Knowledge Base
- Dissertation
How to Write a Thesis or Dissertation Introduction
Published on September 7, 2022 by Tegan George and Shona McCombes. Revised on November 21, 2023.
The introduction is the first section of your thesis or dissertation , appearing right after the table of contents . Your introduction draws your reader in, setting the stage for your research with a clear focus, purpose, and direction on a relevant topic .
Your introduction should include:
- Your topic, in context: what does your reader need to know to understand your thesis dissertation?
- Your focus and scope: what specific aspect of the topic will you address?
- The relevance of your research: how does your work fit into existing studies on your topic?
- Your questions and objectives: what does your research aim to find out, and how?
- An overview of your structure: what does each section contribute to the overall aim?
Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text
Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes
Table of contents
How to start your introduction, topic and context, focus and scope, relevance and importance, questions and objectives, overview of the structure, thesis introduction example, introduction checklist, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about introductions.
Although your introduction kicks off your dissertation, it doesn’t have to be the first thing you write — in fact, it’s often one of the very last parts to be completed (just before your abstract ).
It’s a good idea to write a rough draft of your introduction as you begin your research, to help guide you. If you wrote a research proposal , consider using this as a template, as it contains many of the same elements. However, be sure to revise your introduction throughout the writing process, making sure it matches the content of your ensuing sections.
Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services
Discover proofreading & editing
Begin by introducing your dissertation topic and giving any necessary background information. It’s important to contextualize your research and generate interest. Aim to show why your topic is timely or important. You may want to mention a relevant news item, academic debate, or practical problem.
After a brief introduction to your general area of interest, narrow your focus and define the scope of your research.
You can narrow this down in many ways, such as by:
- Geographical area
- Time period
- Demographics or communities
- Themes or aspects of the topic
It’s essential to share your motivation for doing this research, as well as how it relates to existing work on your topic. Further, you should also mention what new insights you expect it will contribute.
Start by giving a brief overview of the current state of research. You should definitely cite the most relevant literature, but remember that you will conduct a more in-depth survey of relevant sources in the literature review section, so there’s no need to go too in-depth in the introduction.
Depending on your field, the importance of your research might focus on its practical application (e.g., in policy or management) or on advancing scholarly understanding of the topic (e.g., by developing theories or adding new empirical data). In many cases, it will do both.
Ultimately, your introduction should explain how your thesis or dissertation:
- Helps solve a practical or theoretical problem
- Addresses a gap in the literature
- Builds on existing research
- Proposes a new understanding of your topic
Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.
Perhaps the most important part of your introduction is your questions and objectives, as it sets up the expectations for the rest of your thesis or dissertation. How you formulate your research questions and research objectives will depend on your discipline, topic, and focus, but you should always clearly state the central aim of your research.
If your research aims to test hypotheses , you can formulate them here. Your introduction is also a good place for a conceptual framework that suggests relationships between variables .
- Conduct surveys to collect data on students’ levels of knowledge, understanding, and positive/negative perceptions of government policy.
- Determine whether attitudes to climate policy are associated with variables such as age, gender, region, and social class.
- Conduct interviews to gain qualitative insights into students’ perspectives and actions in relation to climate policy.
To help guide your reader, end your introduction with an outline of the structure of the thesis or dissertation to follow. Share a brief summary of each chapter, clearly showing how each contributes to your central aims. However, be careful to keep this overview concise: 1-2 sentences should be enough.
I. Introduction
Human language consists of a set of vowels and consonants which are combined to form words. During the speech production process, thoughts are converted into spoken utterances to convey a message. The appropriate words and their meanings are selected in the mental lexicon (Dell & Burger, 1997). This pre-verbal message is then grammatically coded, during which a syntactic representation of the utterance is built.
Speech, language, and voice disorders affect the vocal cords, nerves, muscles, and brain structures, which result in a distorted language reception or speech production (Sataloff & Hawkshaw, 2014). The symptoms vary from adding superfluous words and taking pauses to hoarseness of the voice, depending on the type of disorder (Dodd, 2005). However, distortions of the speech may also occur as a result of a disease that seems unrelated to speech, such as multiple sclerosis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
This study aims to determine which acoustic parameters are suitable for the automatic detection of exacerbations in patients suffering from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) by investigating which aspects of speech differ between COPD patients and healthy speakers and which aspects differ between COPD patients in exacerbation and stable COPD patients.
Checklist: Introduction
I have introduced my research topic in an engaging way.
I have provided necessary context to help the reader understand my topic.
I have clearly specified the focus of my research.
I have shown the relevance and importance of the dissertation topic .
I have clearly stated the problem or question that my research addresses.
I have outlined the specific objectives of the research .
I have provided an overview of the dissertation’s structure .
You've written a strong introduction for your thesis or dissertation. Use the other checklists to continue improving your dissertation.
If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or research bias, make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!
Research bias
- Survivorship bias
- Self-serving bias
- Availability heuristic
- Halo effect
- Hindsight bias
- Deep learning
- Generative AI
- Machine learning
- Reinforcement learning
- Supervised vs. unsupervised learning
(AI) Tools
- Grammar Checker
- Paraphrasing Tool
- Text Summarizer
- AI Detector
- Plagiarism Checker
- Citation Generator
The introduction of a research paper includes several key elements:
- A hook to catch the reader’s interest
- Relevant background on the topic
- Details of your research problem
and your problem statement
- A thesis statement or research question
- Sometimes an overview of the paper
Don’t feel that you have to write the introduction first. The introduction is often one of the last parts of the research paper you’ll write, along with the conclusion.
This is because it can be easier to introduce your paper once you’ve already written the body ; you may not have the clearest idea of your arguments until you’ve written them, and things can change during the writing process .
Research objectives describe what you intend your research project to accomplish.
They summarize the approach and purpose of the project and help to focus your research.
Your objectives should appear in the introduction of your research paper , at the end of your problem statement .
Scope of research is determined at the beginning of your research process , prior to the data collection stage. Sometimes called “scope of study,” your scope delineates what will and will not be covered in your project. It helps you focus your work and your time, ensuring that you’ll be able to achieve your goals and outcomes.
Defining a scope can be very useful in any research project, from a research proposal to a thesis or dissertation . A scope is needed for all types of research: quantitative , qualitative , and mixed methods .
To define your scope of research, consider the following:
- Budget constraints or any specifics of grant funding
- Your proposed timeline and duration
- Specifics about your population of study, your proposed sample size , and the research methodology you’ll pursue
- Any inclusion and exclusion criteria
- Any anticipated control , extraneous , or confounding variables that could bias your research if not accounted for properly.
Cite this Scribbr article
If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.
George, T. & McCombes, S. (2023, November 21). How to Write a Thesis or Dissertation Introduction. Scribbr. Retrieved February 19, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/introduction-structure/
Is this article helpful?
Tegan George
Other students also liked, how to choose a dissertation topic | 8 steps to follow, how to write an abstract | steps & examples, what is your plagiarism score.
Microsoft 365 Life Hacks > Writing > How to write an introduction for a research paper
How to write an introduction for a research paper
Beginnings are hard. Beginning a research paper is no exception. Many students—and pros—struggle with how to write an introduction for a research paper.
This short guide will describe the purpose of a research paper introduction and how to create a good one.
What is an introduction for a research paper?
Introductions to research papers do a lot of work.
It may seem obvious, but introductions are always placed at the beginning of a paper. They guide your reader from a general subject area to the narrow topic that your paper covers. They also explain your paper’s:
- Scope: The topic you’ll be covering
- Context: The background of your topic
- Importance: Why your research matters in the context of an industry or the world
Your introduction will cover a lot of ground. However, it will only be half of a page to a few pages long. The length depends on the size of your paper as a whole. In many cases, the introduction will be shorter than all of the other sections of your paper.
Write with Confidence using Editor
Elevate your writing with real-time, intelligent assistance
Why is an introduction vital to a research paper?
The introduction to your research paper isn’t just important. It’s critical.
Your readers don’t know what your research paper is about from the title. That’s where your introduction comes in. A good introduction will:
- Help your reader understand your topic’s background
- Explain why your research paper is worth reading
- Offer a guide for navigating the rest of the piece
- Pique your reader’s interest
Without a clear introduction, your readers will struggle. They may feel confused when they start reading your paper. They might even give up entirely. Your introduction will ground them and prepare them for the in-depth research to come.
What should you include in an introduction for a research paper?
Research paper introductions are always unique. After all, research is original by definition. However, they often contain six essential items. These are:
- An overview of the topic. Start with a general overview of your topic. Narrow the overview until you address your paper’s specific subject. Then, mention questions or concerns you had about the case. Note that you will address them in the publication.
- Prior research. Your introduction is the place to review other conclusions on your topic. Include both older scholars and modern scholars. This background information shows that you are aware of prior research. It also introduces past findings to those who might not have that expertise.
- A rationale for your paper. Explain why your topic needs to be addressed right now. If applicable, connect it to current issues. Additionally, you can show a problem with former theories or reveal a gap in current research. No matter how you do it, a good rationale will interest your readers and demonstrate why they must read the rest of your paper.
- Describe the methodology you used. Recount your processes to make your paper more credible. Lay out your goal and the questions you will address. Reveal how you conducted research and describe how you measured results. Moreover, explain why you made key choices.
- A thesis statement. Your main introduction should end with a thesis statement. This statement summarizes the ideas that will run through your entire research article. It should be straightforward and clear.
- An outline. Introductions often conclude with an outline. Your layout should quickly review what you intend to cover in the following sections. Think of it as a roadmap, guiding your reader to the end of your paper.
These six items are emphasized more or less, depending on your field. For example, a physics research paper might emphasize methodology. An English journal article might highlight the overview.
Three tips for writing your introduction
We don’t just want you to learn how to write an introduction for a research paper. We want you to learn how to make it shine.
There are three things you can do that will make it easier to write a great introduction. You can:
- Write your introduction last. An introduction summarizes all of the things you’ve learned from your research. While it can feel good to get your preface done quickly, you should write the rest of your paper first. Then, you’ll find it easy to create a clear overview.
- Include a strong quotation or story upfront. You want your paper to be full of substance. But that doesn’t mean it should feel boring or flat. Add a relevant quotation or surprising anecdote to the beginning of your introduction. This technique will pique the interest of your reader and leave them wanting more.
- Be concise. Research papers cover complex topics. To help your readers, try to write as clearly as possible. Use concise sentences. Check for confusing grammar or syntax . Read your introduction out loud to catch awkward phrases. Before you finish your paper, be sure to proofread, too. Mistakes can seem unprofessional.
Get started with Microsoft 365
It’s the Office you know, plus the tools to help you work better together, so you can get more done—anytime, anywhere.
Topics in this article
More articles like this one.
Why our keyboard layouts are the way they are
Type sentences quickly by understanding the standard keyboard layout. Learn about the QWERTY keyboard layout and alternative layout options.
When to use cannot versus can not
Cannot or can not? Learn when to use each, master their differences, and boost your writing accuracy.
What is forensic linguistics?
Forensic linguistics is employed by legal authorities to help solve crimes. Understand how forensic linguistics works, and how it benefits the legal system.
Understanding the quibble plot device
Plot devices like quibbles are great tools for enhancing a storyline and keeping readers engaged. Learn what a quibble is and how to use them in your writing.
Everything you need to achieve more in less time
Get powerful productivity and security apps with Microsoft 365
Explore Other Categories
Writing an Introduction for a Scientific Paper
Dr. michelle harris, dr. janet batzli, biocore.
This section provides guidelines on how to construct a solid introduction to a scientific paper including background information, study question , biological rationale, hypothesis , and general approach . If the Introduction is done well, there should be no question in the reader’s mind why and on what basis you have posed a specific hypothesis.
Broad Question : based on an initial observation (e.g., “I see a lot of guppies close to the shore. Do guppies like living in shallow water?”). This observation of the natural world may inspire you to investigate background literature or your observation could be based on previous research by others or your own pilot study. Broad questions are not always included in your written text, but are essential for establishing the direction of your research.
Background Information : key issues, concepts, terminology, and definitions needed to understand the biological rationale for the experiment. It often includes a summary of findings from previous, relevant studies. Remember to cite references, be concise, and only include relevant information given your audience and your experimental design. Concisely summarized background information leads to the identification of specific scientific knowledge gaps that still exist. (e.g., “No studies to date have examined whether guppies do indeed spend more time in shallow water.”)
Testable Question : these questions are much more focused than the initial broad question, are specific to the knowledge gap identified, and can be addressed with data. (e.g., “Do guppies spend different amounts of time in water <1 meter deep as compared to their time in water that is >1 meter deep?”)
Biological Rationale : describes the purpose of your experiment distilling what is known and what is not known that defines the knowledge gap that you are addressing. The “BR” provides the logic for your hypothesis and experimental approach, describing the biological mechanism and assumptions that explain why your hypothesis should be true.
The biological rationale is based on your interpretation of the scientific literature, your personal observations, and the underlying assumptions you are making about how you think the system works. If you have written your biological rationale, your reader should see your hypothesis in your introduction section and say to themselves, “Of course, this hypothesis seems very logical based on the rationale presented.”
- A thorough rationale defines your assumptions about the system that have not been revealed in scientific literature or from previous systematic observation. These assumptions drive the direction of your specific hypothesis or general predictions.
- Defining the rationale is probably the most critical task for a writer, as it tells your reader why your research is biologically meaningful. It may help to think about the rationale as an answer to the questions— how is this investigation related to what we know, what assumptions am I making about what we don’t yet know, AND how will this experiment add to our knowledge? *There may or may not be broader implications for your study; be careful not to overstate these (see note on social justifications below).
- Expect to spend time and mental effort on this. You may have to do considerable digging into the scientific literature to define how your experiment fits into what is already known and why it is relevant to pursue.
- Be open to the possibility that as you work with and think about your data, you may develop a deeper, more accurate understanding of the experimental system. You may find the original rationale needs to be revised to reflect your new, more sophisticated understanding.
- As you progress through Biocore and upper level biology courses, your rationale should become more focused and matched with the level of study e ., cellular, biochemical, or physiological mechanisms that underlie the rationale. Achieving this type of understanding takes effort, but it will lead to better communication of your science.
***Special note on avoiding social justifications: You should not overemphasize the relevance of your experiment and the possible connections to large-scale processes. Be realistic and logical —do not overgeneralize or state grand implications that are not sensible given the structure of your experimental system. Not all science is easily applied to improving the human condition. Performing an investigation just for the sake of adding to our scientific knowledge (“pure or basic science”) is just as important as applied science. In fact, basic science often provides the foundation for applied studies.
Hypothesis / Predictions : specific prediction(s) that you will test during your experiment. For manipulative experiments, the hypothesis should include the independent variable (what you manipulate), the dependent variable(s) (what you measure), the organism or system , the direction of your results, and comparison to be made.
If you are doing a systematic observation , your hypothesis presents a variable or set of variables that you predict are important for helping you characterize the system as a whole, or predict differences between components/areas of the system that help you explain how the system functions or changes over time.
Experimental Approach : Briefly gives the reader a general sense of the experiment, the type of data it will yield, and the kind of conclusions you expect to obtain from the data. Do not confuse the experimental approach with the experimental protocol . The experimental protocol consists of the detailed step-by-step procedures and techniques used during the experiment that are to be reported in the Methods and Materials section.
Some Final Tips on Writing an Introduction
- As you progress through the Biocore sequence, for instance, from organismal level of Biocore 301/302 to the cellular level in Biocore 303/304, we expect the contents of your “Introduction” paragraphs to reflect the level of your coursework and previous writing experience. For example, in Biocore 304 (Cell Biology Lab) biological rationale should draw upon assumptions we are making about cellular and biochemical processes.
- Be Concise yet Specific: Remember to be concise and only include relevant information given your audience and your experimental design. As you write, keep asking, “Is this necessary information or is this irrelevant detail?” For example, if you are writing a paper claiming that a certain compound is a competitive inhibitor to the enzyme alkaline phosphatase and acts by binding to the active site, you need to explain (briefly) Michaelis-Menton kinetics and the meaning and significance of Km and Vmax. This explanation is not necessary if you are reporting the dependence of enzyme activity on pH because you do not need to measure Km and Vmax to get an estimate of enzyme activity.
- Another example: if you are writing a paper reporting an increase in Daphnia magna heart rate upon exposure to caffeine you need not describe the reproductive cycle of magna unless it is germane to your results and discussion. Be specific and concrete, especially when making introductory or summary statements.
Where Do You Discuss Pilot Studies? Many times it is important to do pilot studies to help you get familiar with your experimental system or to improve your experimental design. If your pilot study influences your biological rationale or hypothesis, you need to describe it in your Introduction. If your pilot study simply informs the logistics or techniques, but does not influence your rationale, then the description of your pilot study belongs in the Materials and Methods section.
How will introductions be evaluated? The following is part of the rubric we will be using to evaluate your papers.
How to Write an Introduction for a Research Paper
How to write an introduction for a research paper? Eventually (and with practice) all writers will develop their own strategy for writing the perfect introduction for a research paper. Once you are comfortable with writing, you will probably find your own, but coming up with a good strategy can be tough for beginning writers.
The Purpose of an Introduction
Your opening paragraphs, phrases for introducing thesis statements, research paper introduction examples, using the introduction to map out your research paper.
Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services
Get 10% off with 24start discount code.
- First write your thesis.Your thesis should state the main idea in specific terms.
- After you have a working thesis, tackle the body of your paper before you write the rest of the introduction. Each paragraph in the body should explore one specific topic that proves, or summarizes your thesis. Writing is a thinking process. Once you have worked your way through that process by writing the body of the paper, you will have an intimate understanding of how you are supporting your thesis. After you have written the body paragraphs, go back and rewrite your thesis to make it more specific and to connect it to the topics you addressed in the body paragraph.
- Revise your introduction several times, saving each revision. Be sure your introduction previews the topics you are presenting in your paper. One way of doing this is to use keywords from the topic sentences in each paragraph to introduce, or preview, the topics in your introduction.This “preview” will give your reader a context for understanding how you will make your case.
- Experiment by taking different approaches to your thesis with every revision you make. Play with the language in the introduction. Strike a new tone. Go back and compare versions. Then pick the one that works most effectively with the body of your research paper.
- Do not try to pack everything you want to say into your introduction. Just as your introduction should not be too short, it should also not be too long. Your introduction should be about the same length as any other paragraph in your research paper. Let the content—what you have to say—dictate the length.
The first page of your research paper should draw the reader into the text. It is the paper’s most important page and, alas, often the worst written. There are two culprits here and effective ways to cope with both of them.
First, the writer is usually straining too hard to say something terribly BIG and IMPORTANT about the thesis topic. The goal is worthy, but the aim is unrealistically high. The result is often a muddle of vague platitudes rather than a crisp, compelling introduction to the thesis. Want a familiar example? Listen to most graduation speakers. Their goal couldn’t be loftier: to say what education means and to tell an entire football stadium how to live the rest of their lives. The results are usually an avalanche of clichés and sodden prose.
The second culprit is bad timing. The opening and concluding paragraphs are usually written late in the game, after the rest of the thesis is finished and polished. There’s nothing wrong with writing these sections last. It’s usually the right approach since you need to know exactly what you are saying in the substantive middle sections of the thesis before you can introduce them effectively or draw together your findings. But having waited to write the opening and closing sections, you need to review and edit them several times to catch up. Otherwise, you’ll putting the most jagged prose in the most tender spots. Edit and polish your opening paragraphs with extra care. They should draw readers into the paper.
After you’ve done some extra polishing, I suggest a simple test for the introductory section. As an experiment, chop off the first few paragraphs. Let the paper begin on, say, paragraph 2 or even page 2. If you don’t lose much, or actually gain in clarity and pace, then you’ve got a problem.
There are two solutions. One is to start at this new spot, further into the text. After all, that’s where you finally gain traction on your subject. That works best in some cases, and we occasionally suggest it. The alternative, of course, is to write a new opening that doesn’t flop around, saying nothing.
What makes a good opening? Actually, they come in several flavors. One is an intriguing story about your topic. Another is a brief, compelling quote. When you run across them during your reading, set them aside for later use. Don’t be deterred from using them because they “don’t seem academic enough.” They’re fine as long as the rest of the paper doesn’t sound like you did your research in People magazine. The third, and most common, way to begin is by stating your main questions, followed by a brief comment about why they matter.
Whichever opening you choose, it should engage your readers and coax them to continue. Having done that, you should give them a general overview of the project—the main issues you will cover, the material you will use, and your thesis statement (that is, your basic approach to the topic). Finally, at the end of the introductory section, give your readers a brief road map, showing how the paper will unfold. How you do that depends on your topic but here are some general suggestions for phrase choice that may help:
- This analysis will provide …
- This paper analyzes the relationship between …
- This paper presents an analysis of …
- This paper will argue that …
- This topic supports the argument that…
- Research supports the opinion that …
- This paper supports the opinion that …
- An interpretation of the facts indicates …
- The results of this experiment show …
- The results of this research show …
Comparisons/Contrasts
- A comparison will show that …
- By contrasting the results,we see that …
- This paper examines the advantages and disadvantages of …
Definitions/Classifications
- This paper will provide a guide for categorizing the following:…
- This paper provides a definition of …
- This paper explores the meaning of …
- This paper will discuss the implications of …
- A discussion of this topic reveals …
- The following discussion will focus on …
Description
- This report describes…
- This report will illustrate…
- This paper provides an illustration of …
Process/Experimentation
- This paper will identify the reasons behind…
- The results of the experiment show …
- The process revealed that …
- This paper theorizes…
- This paper presents the theory that …
- In theory, this indicates that …
Quotes, anecdotes, questions, examples, and broad statements—all of them can used successfully to write an introduction for a research paper. It’s instructive to see them in action, in the hands of skilled academic writers.
Let’s begin with David M. Kennedy’s superb history, Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929–1945 . Kennedy begins each chapter with a quote, followed by his text. The quote above chapter 1 shows President Hoover speaking in 1928 about America’s golden future. The text below it begins with the stock market collapse of 1929. It is a riveting account of just how wrong Hoover was. The text about the Depression is stronger because it contrasts so starkly with the optimistic quotation.
“We in America today are nearer the final triumph over poverty than ever before in the history of any land.”—Herbert Hoover, August 11, 1928 Like an earthquake, the stock market crash of October 1929 cracked startlingly across the United States, the herald of a crisis that was to shake the American way of life to its foundations. The events of the ensuing decade opened a fissure across the landscape of American history no less gaping than that opened by the volley on Lexington Common in April 1775 or by the bombardment of Sumter on another April four score and six years later. The ratcheting ticker machines in the autumn of 1929 did not merely record avalanching stock prices. In time they came also to symbolize the end of an era. (David M. Kennedy, Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929–1945 . New York: Oxford University Press, 1999, p. 10)
Kennedy has exciting, wrenching material to work with. John Mueller faces the exact opposite problem. In Retreat from Doomsday: The Obsolescence of Major War , he is trying to explain why Great Powers have suddenly stopped fighting each other. For centuries they made war on each other with devastating regularity, killing millions in the process. But now, Mueller thinks, they have not just paused; they have stopped permanently. He is literally trying to explain why “nothing is happening now.” That may be an exciting topic intellectually, it may have great practical significance, but “nothing happened” is not a very promising subject for an exciting opening paragraph. Mueller manages to make it exciting and, at the same time, shows why it matters so much. Here’s his opening, aptly entitled “History’s Greatest Nonevent”:
On May 15, 1984, the major countries of the developed world had managed to remain at peace with each other for the longest continuous stretch of time since the days of the Roman Empire. If a significant battle in a war had been fought on that day, the press would have bristled with it. As usual, however, a landmark crossing in the history of peace caused no stir: the most prominent story in the New York Times that day concerned the saga of a manicurist, a machinist, and a cleaning woman who had just won a big Lotto contest. This book seeks to develop an explanation for what is probably the greatest nonevent in human history. (John Mueller, Retreat from Doomsday: The Obsolescence of Major War . New York: Basic Books, 1989, p. 3)
In the space of a few sentences, Mueller sets up his puzzle and reveals its profound human significance. At the same time, he shows just how easy it is to miss this milestone in the buzz of daily events. Notice how concretely he does that. He doesn’t just say that the New York Times ignored this record setting peace. He offers telling details about what they covered instead: “a manicurist, a machinist, and a cleaning woman who had just won a big Lotto contest.” Likewise, David Kennedy immediately entangles us in concrete events: the stunning stock market crash of 1929. These are powerful openings that capture readers’ interests, establish puzzles, and launch narratives.
Sociologist James Coleman begins in a completely different way, by posing the basic questions he will study. His ambitious book, Foundations of Social Theory , develops a comprehensive theory of social life, so it is entirely appropriate for him to begin with some major questions. But he could just as easily have begun with a compelling story or anecdote. He includes many of them elsewhere in his book. His choice for the opening, though, is to state his major themes plainly and frame them as a paradox. Sociologists, he says, are interested in aggregate behavior—how people act in groups, organizations, or large numbers—yet they mostly examine individuals:
A central problem in social science is that of accounting for the function of some kind of social system. Yet in most social research, observations are not made on the system as a whole, but on some part of it. In fact, the natural unit of observation is the individual person… This has led to a widening gap between theory and research… (James S. Coleman, Foundations of Social Theory . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990, pp. 1–2)
After expanding on this point, Coleman explains that he will not try to remedy the problem by looking solely at groups or aggregate-level data. That’s a false solution, he says, because aggregates don’t act; individuals do. So the real problem is to show the links between individual actions and aggregate outcomes, between the micro and the macro.
The major problem for explanations of system behavior based on actions and orientations at a level below that of the system [in this case, on individual-level actions] is that of moving from the lower level to the system level. This has been called the micro-to-macro problem, and it is pervasive throughout the social sciences. (Coleman, Foundations of Social Theory , p. 6)
Explaining how to deal with this “micro-to-macro problem” is the central issue of Coleman’s book, and he announces it at the beginning.
Coleman’s theory-driven opening stands at the opposite end of the spectrum from engaging stories or anecdotes, which are designed to lure the reader into the narrative and ease the path to a more analytic treatment later in the text. Take, for example, the opening sentences of Robert L. Herbert’s sweeping study Impressionism: Art, Leisure, and Parisian Society : “When Henry Tuckerman came to Paris in 1867, one of the thousands of Americans attracted there by the huge international exposition, he was bowled over by the extraordinary changes since his previous visit twenty years before.” (Robert L. Herbert, Impressionism: Art, Leisure, and Parisian Society . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1988, p. 1.) Herbert fills in the evocative details to set the stage for his analysis of the emerging Impressionist art movement and its connection to Parisian society and leisure in this period.
David Bromwich writes about Wordsworth, a poet so familiar to students of English literature that it is hard to see him afresh, before his great achievements, when he was just a young outsider starting to write. To draw us into Wordsworth’s early work, Bromwich wants us to set aside our entrenched images of the famous mature poet and see him as he was in the 1790s, as a beginning writer on the margins of society. He accomplishes this ambitious task in the opening sentences of Disowned by Memory: Wordsworth’s Poetry of the 1790s :
Wordsworth turned to poetry after the revolution to remind himself that he was still a human being. It was a curious solution, to a difficulty many would not have felt. The whole interest of his predicament is that he did feel it. Yet Wordsworth is now so established an eminence—his name so firmly fixed with readers as a moralist of self-trust emanating from complete self-security—that it may seem perverse to imagine him as a criminal seeking expiation. Still, that is a picture we get from The Borderers and, at a longer distance, from “Tintern Abbey.” (David Bromwich, Disowned by Memory: Wordsworth’s Poetry of the 1790s . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998, p. 1)
That’s a wonderful opening! Look at how much Bromwich accomplishes in just a few words. He not only prepares the way for analyzing Wordsworth’s early poetry; he juxtaposes the anguished young man who wrote it to the self-confident, distinguished figure he became—the eminent man we can’t help remembering as we read his early poetry.
Let us highlight a couple of other points in this passage because they illustrate some intelligent writing choices. First, look at the odd comma in this sentence: “It was a curious solution, to a difficulty many would not have felt.” Any standard grammar book would say that comma is wrong and should be omitted. Why did Bromwich insert it? Because he’s a fine writer, thinking of his sentence rhythm and the point he wants to make. The comma does exactly what it should. It makes us pause, breaking the sentence into two parts, each with an interesting point. One is that Wordsworth felt a difficulty others would not have; the other is that he solved it in a distinctive way. It would be easy for readers to glide over this double message, so Bromwich has inserted a speed bump to slow us down. Most of the time, you should follow grammatical rules, like those about commas, but you should bend them when it serves a good purpose. That’s what the writer does here.
The second small point is the phrase “after the revolution” in the first sentence: “Wordsworth turned to poetry after the revolution to remind himself that he was still a human being.” Why doesn’t Bromwich say “after the French Revolution”? Because he has judged his book’s audience. He is writing for specialists who already know which revolution is reverberating through English life in the 1790s. It is the French Revolution, not the earlier loss of the American colonies. If Bromwich were writing for a much broader audience—say, the New York Times Book Review—he would probably insert the extra word to avoid confusion.
The message “Know your audience” applies to all writers. Don’t talk down to them by assuming they can’t get dressed in the morning. Don’t strut around showing off your book learnin’ by tossing in arcane facts and esoteric language for its own sake. Neither will win over readers.
Bromwich, Herbert, and Coleman open their works in different ways, but their choices work well for their different texts. Your task is to decide what kind of opening will work best for yours. Don’t let that happen by default, by grabbing the first idea you happen upon. Consider a couple of different ways of opening your thesis and then choose the one you prefer. Give yourself some options, think them over, then make an informed choice.
Whether you begin with a story, puzzle, or broad statement, the next part of the introduction should pose your main questions and establish your argument. This is your thesis statement—your viewpoint along with the supporting reasons and evidence. It should be articulated plainly so readers understand full well what your paper is about and what it will argue.
After that, give your readers a road map of what’s to come. That’s normally done at the end of the introductory section (or, in a book, at the end of the introductory chapter). Here’s John J. Mearsheimer presenting such a road map in The Tragedy of Great Power Politics . He not only tells us the order of upcoming chapters, he explains why he’s chosen that order and which chapters are most important:
The Plan of the Book The rest of the chapters in this book are concerned mainly with answering the six big questions about power which I identified earlier. Chapter 2, which is probably the most important chapter in the book, lays out my theory of why states compete for power and why they pursue hegemony. In Chapters 3 and 4, I define power and explain how to measure it. I do this in order to lay the groundwork for testing my theory… (John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics . New York: W. W. Norton, 2001, p. 27)
As this excerpt makes clear, Mearsheimer has already laid out his “six big questions” in the introduction. Now he’s showing us the path ahead, the path to answering those questions.
At the end of the introduction, give your readers a road map of what’s to come. Tell them what the upcoming sections will be and why they are arranged in this particular order.
After having written your introduction it’s time to move to the biggest part: body of a research paper.
Back to How To Write A Research Paper .
ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER
Home → Academic Writing → How to Write a Research Paper Introduction: Hook, Line, and Sinker
How to Write a Research Paper Introduction: Hook, Line, and Sinker
Jordan Kruszynski
- January 4, 2024
Want to know how to write a research paper introduction that dazzles?
Struggling to hook your reader in with your opening sentences?
Crafting a captivating research paper introduction can be the difference between a mediocre paper and an outstanding one. The introduction sets the tone for the entire paper, and if it fails to capture the reader’s attention, your hard work may go unnoticed. In this post, we’ll explore some techniques for crafting a compelling introduction that will hook your reader from the very beginning. From using statistics to posing thought-provoking questions, we’ll show you how to reel in your reader hook, line, and sinker.
So, grab your pen and paper, and let’s get started!
What Makes a Captivating Introduction?
When it comes to writing a research paper, the introduction is everything. It’s the first glimpse your audience gets of what’s to come and the determining factor as to whether they continue reading or move on. A captivating introduction should immediately grab the reader’s attention and draw them in, enticing them to learn more about your unique research. It should be thought-provoking, relevant and informative.
By connecting with your audience and allowing them to identify with your work, you create an emotional investment from the start. You might be thinking that a research paper introduction only needs to provide cold, hard information, but this is missing half of the picture. If you can blend quality information with skilful writing, you’ll ensure that your reader remains engaged and open to your argument throughout the entirety of your paper. So, when crafting your introduction, strive to be engaging and focus on making a strong impression.
Pre-Writing Strategies for Crafting an Effective Introduction
Crafting that quality introduction begins even before you put pen to paper (or finger to keyboard). Start planning mentally with the following tips:
- Try to ‘visualise’ your research from beginning to end. Your paper is your means of guiding the reader through that research. Imagine that you’re going to take the reader by the hand and walk them through it. What do they need to know before you set off? What’s going to convince them to take the journey? Thinking along these lines will set you in the right frame of mind for writing.
- Remember that your introduction acts as a roadmap, directing readers towards your key points and arguments and letting them know what to expect. Thinking in terms of providing a map will clarify your writing decisions.
- Think clearly and with confidence. If your introduction is vague, lacks sufficient information or is otherwise unconvincing, your reader may become disengaged from the outset.
How to Write a Research Paper Introduction with Clarity and Style
With your thoughts flowing, you can now turn to the act of writing your introduction, Each of the sections outlined below will typically take up one paragraph of your intro, with the exception of the literature review, which is likely to occupy several.
- Always keep in mind that anyone can read your paper, not just an academically literate audience. With this in mind, begin by introducing your subject generally, ideally in a way that a layperson could understand. If you overwhelm your reader with technical language from the outset, they may become frustrated and stop reading.
- Your subject introduction might include some historical context, or a brief overview of the significance of your field. Either way, prepare to narrow down that general overview to your specific research. Let the reader know what you’re working on.
- More importantly, explain why your research is important. Perhaps you’re seeking to fill in a gap in the historical record, or are working on medication that could help people with a specific illness. Be clear about why your research could make a difference and why the reader should pay attention to it.
Literature Review
- At this point, you can go into more detail on existing research efforts in your field with a literature review. Find out all about these and how to construct them in our complete guide . (Add link to lit. review post once it’s published)
Research Intention
- Here, go into detail on the intention of your research. If you have a hypothesis, state it, or if you’re approaching your work with a broader, more open research question, then set it out.
- Briefly discuss your research methods, keeping in mind that you’ll probably be writing a complete methodology section later.
Paper Overview
- In this optional section, provide a brief overview of your whole paper by section, outlining what you intend to do in each of them – for example ‘In Section 4 we describe our methodology in detail. In Section 5 we present our data without analysis. In Section 6 we conduct an analysis of the data.’
As we mentioned before, balancing quality information with skilful, engaging writing can grab your reader’s attention right from the start. One way to do this is through a hook. But what makes a good hook?
- It could be a statistic, taken either from your own research or elsewhere. Naturally, it should be relevant to your topic, as well as thought-provoking – a figure that makes your reader sit up and take notice of what you’re about to say. For example, if your paper focuses on marine plastics, then consider using a statistic to illustrate just how prevalent the problem is.
- It might be a reference to a current event that is garnering a lot of attention. If you can connect that event to your research, and prove its social relevance, you can potentially earn more readers than you might expect.
- You could even use a quotation, for example from a respected academic in your field. This can act as a point of inspiration for both you and your reader. There’s nothing stopping you from being creative in your introduction, and if your hook is directly relevant to your research, then it can take whatever shape you like.
Final Thoughts
The introductory paragraphs of your research paper are your chance to make a great first impression. By crafting a captivating introduction, you can draw your reader in and set the stage for an outstanding paper. From using powerful statistics to posing thought-provoking questions, there are many techniques you can use to hook your reader from the very beginning. So don’t be afraid to get creative and experiment with different approaches until you find one that works for you.
With these tips in mind, you’ll know how to write a research paper introduction that will leave your audience hooked, lined, and sunk!
Looking for introduction inspiration? Check out the array of papers available on Audemic , where you can listen to your heart’s content until you find the one that hits right!
Keep striving, researchers! ✨
Table of Contents
Related articles.
How to Publish a Research Paper: A Step-by-Step Guide
You’re in academia. You’re going steady. Your research is going well and you begin to wonder: ‘How exactly do I get a
Behind the Scenes: What Does a Research Assistant Do?
Have you ever wondered what goes on behind the scenes in a research lab? Does it involve acting out the whims of
Want to know how to write a research paper introduction that dazzles? Struggling to hook your reader in with your opening sentences?
Blog Podcast
Privacy policy Terms of service
Subscribe to our newsletter!
Discover more from Audemic: Access any academic research via audio
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
Type your email…
Continue reading
How to Write an Effective Introduction
Affiliations.
- 1 Sydney Kimmel Medical College.
- 2 Rothman Institute, Philadelphia, PA.
- PMID: 30234565
- DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000714
Ideally, the Introduction is an essential attention grabbing section of a research paper. If written correctly, the Introduction peaks the reader's interest as well as serves as a roadmap for the rest of the paper. An effective Introduction builds off related empirical research and demonstrates a gap in which the current study fills. Finally, the Introduction proposes the research question(s) which will be answered in subsequent sections of the paper. A strong Introduction also requires the use of a simple and well-organized format as well as the avoidance of common pitfalls.
- Medical Writing*
- Orthopedic Procedures*
- Translators
- Graphic Designers
- Editing Services
- Academic Editing Services
- Admissions Editing Services
- Admissions Essay Editing Services
- AI Content Editing Services
- APA Style Editing Services
- Application Essay Editing Services
- Book Editing Services
- Business Editing Services
- Capstone Paper Editing Services
- Children's Book Editing Services
- College Application Editing Services
- College Essay Editing Services
- Copy Editing Services
- Developmental Editing Services
- Dissertation Editing Services
- eBook Editing Services
- English Editing Services
- Horror Story Editing Services
- Legal Editing Services
- Line Editing Services
- Manuscript Editing Services
- MLA Style Editing Services
- Novel Editing Services
- Paper Editing Services
- Personal Statement Editing Services
- Research Paper Editing Services
- Résumé Editing Services
- Scientific Editing Services
- Short Story Editing Services
- Statement of Purpose Editing Services
- Substantive Editing Services
- Thesis Editing Services
Proofreading
- Proofreading Services
- Admissions Essay Proofreading Services
- Children's Book Proofreading Services
- Legal Proofreading Services
- Novel Proofreading Services
- Personal Statement Proofreading Services
- Research Proposal Proofreading Services
- Statement of Purpose Proofreading Services
Translation
- Translation Services
Graphic Design
- Graphic Design Services
- Dungeons & Dragons Design Services
- Sticker Design Services
- Writing Services
Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.
How to Write an Effective Research Paper Introduction
The introduction of a research paper has several purposes. It presents your topic, describes the problem your research seeks to solve, and outlines the structure of your paper. It can also inform your audience about how your study differs from the research that has already been done. Generally, the introduction helps you to show your audience why your research topic is worth exploring. It gives you the chance to convince your reader why they should stick around and see what you have to say.
The first 1-2 sentences of your introduction should give an elevator pitch of your work. Be clear, relevant, and to the point. Don't sweat the engagement of your first sentences. You might have heard the advice that, when writing, you should use the first few sentences to wow your readers, transporting them into a lyrical world of imagination. While this is certainly good counsel in creative writing or consumer literature to hook your reader, research papers are another story; you won't need quotes from wise heroes of the past to grab your readers' attention. In most cases, your audience comprises people already interested in the field who are intrigued by your title and want to delve into what you have found through your study, and you don't want to include trite snippets right at the outset. Of course, you don't want to bore your readers either, so strive for clarity and direct information about your study so the readers who navigate to your paper know what they can expect.
To introduce your research paper effectively, include the following elements in your introduction. You will expand on these topics in greater detail in the paper, but in the introduction to your paper, you'll provide a summary of each one.
- Overview: Provide a focused statement on the subject matter of your research. What questions are you seeking to answer? How will your study make the world a better place? Here you can also briefly describe any problems you encountered while conducting your study (and be sure to state that you will address these problems within the paper!).
- Prior research: It's important that your audience knows you've already explored the field and looked around at what has already been written. Briefly discuss what past studies have concluded on the subject and what that means for your current study. Maybe in your search, you found that your research is the first to address your specific topic, which is why your study is so valuable. Let your readers know that you've done your homework.
- Rationale: Make your case regarding why your study is important today. What will your findings bring to the field? Your research could address current issues and events, or it might illuminate gaps in previous research that need to be filled in order to move ahead in the academic field and strengthen future studies.
- Methodology: In your methodology paragraph, briefly name the processes you applied during your study. Why are these tools the best ones for your specific research? What answers do you get from using these methods? Details on your methodology can bring credibility to your study and help with future application of your findings to similar fields.
- Outline of the paper: At the conclusion on your introduction, offer a review of what your study will discuss specifically in the sections that follow.
Once you've gathered all of the necessary elements for your introduction, try these tips to make your introduction pop:
- Try finalizing your introduction after you've finished writing the body of the paper. While it's beneficial to map out what you want your introduction to say before you begin your paper, wait until you've elaborated on your research in detail, and then create your introduction. With the entire work fresh in your mind, you have a clear grasp on what it's about, your purpose in writing it, and what the study results mean for the world.
- Show, don't tell. When giving a brief summary of your work, give compelling details about why this study is a good one to conduct. Remember, you still want to be brief, but you can accomplish clarity and brevity while also enticing your readers to share your vision. For example, instead of stating, "Dual language educational programs are important for children," consider saying, "Dual language programs help students develop increased cognitive function, future linguistic advantages, and a broadened worldview."
- Keep it simple. Don't bury the good points of your work in excessive detail within the introduction. Your entire paper is where you will delve into the finer points of the research, so take stock of which ideas are the most important and stick to those nuggets to motivate your audience to read on.
- Speak to a broader audience. Your research will certainly attract specialists in the field who know every term you could possibly throw at them, but your audience also includes laymen and people who haven't spent as much time in the field as you have, knee-deep in your study. Remember to make your introduction accessible to those who aren't familiar with the industry jargon. The body of the paper is a great place to flex your muscles and the nitty-gritty details of your research results, but the introduction should be consumable by a much more general group. If you have to use specialized language, make sure to define those obscure terms that only a select few people would know.
Your introduction gives your readers greater access to your work. You are the expert, of course, but your goal is to display your findings to a broader audience, and your introduction is the key to accomplishing that objective. Follow these tips and examples to help you create a strong introductory section for your research paper.
Related Posts
7 Mistakes to Avoid When Emailing Professors
Your Guide to Research Sampling Methods
- Academic Writing Advice
- All Blog Posts
- Writing Advice
- Admissions Writing Advice
- Book Writing Advice
- Short Story Advice
- Employment Writing Advice
- Business Writing Advice
- Web Content Advice
- Article Writing Advice
- Magazine Writing Advice
- Grammar Advice
- Dialect Advice
- Editing Advice
- Freelance Advice
- Legal Writing Advice
- Poetry Advice
- Graphic Design Advice
- Logo Design Advice
- Translation Advice
- Blog Reviews
- Short Story Award Winners
- Scholarship Winners
Elevate your research paper with expert editing services
- Bipolar Disorder
- Therapy Center
- When To See a Therapist
- Types of Therapy
- Best Online Therapy
- Best Couples Therapy
- Best Family Therapy
- Managing Stress
- Sleep and Dreaming
- Understanding Emotions
- Self-Improvement
- Healthy Relationships
- Student Resources
- Personality Types
- Verywell Mind Insights
- 2023 Verywell Mind 25
- Mental Health in the Classroom
- Editorial Process
- Meet Our Review Board
- Crisis Support
How to Write an Introduction for a Psychology Paper
Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."
Emily is a board-certified science editor who has worked with top digital publishing brands like Voices for Biodiversity, Study.com, GoodTherapy, Vox, and Verywell.
- Writing Tips
If you are writing a psychology paper, it is essential to kick things off with a strong introduction. The introduction to a psychology research paper helps your readers understand why the topic is important and what they need to know before they delve deeper.
Your goal in this section is to introduce the topic to the reader, provide an overview of previous research on the topic, and identify your own hypothesis .
At a Glance
Writing a great introduction can be a great foundation for the rest of your psychology paper. To create a strong intro:
- Research your topic
- Outline your paper
- Introduce your topic
- Summarize the previous research
- Present your hypothesis or main argument
Before You Write an Introduction
There are some important steps you need to take before you even begin writing your introduction. To know what to write, you need to collect important background information and create a detailed plan.
Research Your Topic
Search a journal database, PsychInfo or ERIC, to find articles on your subject. Once you have located an article, look at the reference section to locate other studies cited in the article. As you take notes from these articles, be sure to write down where you found the information.
A simple note detailing the author's name, journal, and date of publication can help you keep track of sources and avoid plagiarism.
Create a Detailed Outline
This is often one of the most boring and onerous steps, so students tend to skip outlining and go straight to writing. Creating an outline might seem tedious, but it can be an enormous time-saver down the road and will make the writing process much easier.
Start by looking over the notes you made during the research process and consider how you want to present all of your ideas and research.
Introduce the Topic
Once you are ready to write your introduction, your first task is to provide a brief description of the research question. What is the experiment or study attempting to demonstrate? What phenomena are you studying? Provide a brief history of your topic and explain how it relates to your current research.
As you are introducing your topic, consider what makes it important. Why should it matter to your reader? The goal of your introduction is not only to let your reader know what your paper is about, but also to justify why it is important for them to learn more.
If your paper tackles a controversial subject and is focused on resolving the issue, it is important to summarize both sides of the controversy in a fair and impartial way. Consider how your paper fits in with the relevant research on the topic.
The introduction of a research paper is designed to grab interest. It should present a compelling look at the research that already exists and explain to readers what questions your own paper will address.
Summarize Previous Research
The second task of your introduction is to provide a well-rounded summary of previous research that is relevant to your topic. So, before you begin to write this summary, it is important to research your topic thoroughly.
Finding appropriate sources amid thousands of journal articles can be a daunting task, but there are several steps you can take to simplify your research. If you have completed the initial steps of researching and keeping detailed notes, writing your introduction will be much easier.
It is essential to give the reader a good overview of the historical context of the issue you are writing about, but do not feel like you must provide an exhaustive review of the subject. Focus on hitting the main points, and try to include the most relevant studies.
You might describe previous research findings and then explain how the current study differs or expands upon earlier research.
Provide Your Hypothesis
Once you have summarized the previous research, explain areas where the research is lacking or potentially flawed. What is missing from previous studies on your topic? What research questions have yet to be answered? Your hypothesis should lead to these questions.
At the end of your introduction, offer your hypothesis and describe what you expected to find in your experiment or study.
The introduction should be relatively brief. You want to give your readers an overview of a topic, explain why you are addressing it, and provide your arguments.
Tips for Writing Your Psychology Paper Intro
- Use 3x5 inch note cards to write down notes and sources.
- Look in professional psychology journals for examples of introductions.
- Remember to cite your sources.
- Maintain a working bibliography with all of the sources you might use in your final paper. This will make it much easier to prepare your reference section later on.
- Use a copy of the APA style manual to ensure that your introduction and references are in proper APA format .
What This Means For You
Before you delve into the main body of your paper, you need to give your readers some background and present your main argument in the introduction of you paper. You can do this by first explaining what your topic is about, summarizing past research, and then providing your thesis.
Armağan A. How to write an introduction section of a scientific article ? Turk J Urol . 2013;39(Suppl 1):8-9. doi:10.5152/tud.2013.046
Fried T, Foltz C, Lendner M, Vaccaro AR. How to write an effective introduction . Clin Spine Surg . 2019;32(3):111-112. doi:10.1097/BSD.0000000000000714
Jawaid SA, Jawaid M. How to write introduction and discussion . Saudi J Anaesth . 2019;13(Suppl 1):S18-S19. doi:10.4103/sja.SJA_584_18
American Psychological Association. Information Recommended for Inclusion in Manuscripts That Report New Data Collections Regardless of Research Design . Published 2020.
By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."
- Open access
- Published: 20 February 2024
The co-production process of an assessment programme: Between clarifying identity and developing the quality of French-speaking Belgian community health centres
- Madeleine Capiau ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0000-2393-6299 1 ,
- Jean Macq 1 &
- Sophie Thunus 1
Health Research Policy and Systems volume 22 , Article number: 28 ( 2024 ) Cite this article
Metrics details
The assessment of primary care organizations is considered to be essential for improving care. However, the assessments’ acceptability to professionals poses a challenge. Developing assessment programmes in collaboration with the end-users is a strategy that is widely encouraged to make interventions better targeted. By doing so, it can help to prevent resistance and encourage adherence to the assessment. This process, however, is rarely reported. This paper aims to fill this gap by describing the process of the co-production of an assessment programme for community health centres (CHCs) affiliated to the Federation of Community Health Centres (FCHC) in French-speaking Belgium.
We conducted a documentary study on the co-production of the assessment programme before carrying out semi-structured interviews with the stakeholders involved in its development.
CHCs in French-speaking Belgium are increasing in number and are becoming more diverse. For the FCHC, this growth and diversification pose challenges for the meaning of CHC (an identity challenge) and what beneficiaries can expect in terms of the quality of organizations declaring themselves CHC (a quality challenge). Faced with this double challenge, the FCHC decided to develop an assessment programme, initially called Label, using participatory action research. During the co-production process, this initial programme version was abandoned in favour of a new name “DEQuaP”. This new name embodies new objectives and new design regarding the assessment programme. When studying the co-production process, we attributed these changes to two controversies. The first concerns how much and which type of variety is desired among CHCs part of the FCHC. The second concerns the organization of the FCHC in its capacity as a federation. It shed light on tensions between two professional segments that, in this paper, we called “political professionalism” and “pragmatic professionalism”.
Conclusions
These controversies show the importance of underlying challenges behind the development of an assessment programme for CHCs. This provided information about the evolution of the identity of multidisciplinary organizations in primary care. Issues raised in the development of this assessment programme also show the importance of considering assessment methods that reflect and embody the current realities of these organizations and the way of developing these assessment methods.
Peer Review reports
Introduction
Primary care, an essential part of programme in the health system, is under pressure due to current demographic, epidemiological and economic challenges [ 1 , 2 ]. The quality of primary care has therefore become an area of concern for public authorities [ 1 ]. Quality assessment is now a key factor in the regulation of primary care organizations [ 3 ]. An increasing number of quality assessment programmes have been introduced, as has been observed for some time in the area of hospital care [ 4 , 5 ]. Those programmes incorporate different methods, such as assessment by care consumers, and external assessors as well as self-assessment by the professionals themselves [ 4 , 5 ].
Studies have shown that these assessment programmes can bring about an improvement in the quality of care [ 6 , 7 , 8 ]. Other studies have shown, however, that incorporating them into the management of health organizations leads to mixed responses and sometimes conflicting reactions from professionals [ 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. Such reactions can be explained by the professionals’ differing interests, perceptions and values regarding assessment [ 13 ]. Discrepancies can cause competition between professionals, undermining the overall process and the results of the assessment [ 16 ].
Involving stakeholders in the development of an assessment programme is one way to anticipate possible resistance [ 13 , 17 , 18 ]. Co-production allows the different stakeholders (those who commission it, those who carry it out and those who are themselves assessed) to work closely together [ 19 ]. The underlying assumption is that the involvement of stakeholders in the development of these interventions makes them more acceptable. Being better targeted to the realities of the end-users, avoids having assessment programmes that often fail in terms of feasibility, efficiency and public adherence [ 20 , 21 ]. However, most of these programmes are imposed externally without any consultation of their end-users [ 18 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ]. Stakeholders often have different visions, expectations and knowledge about the assessment. In practice, the time devoted to co-production gives rise to a series of discussions between stakeholders during which they discuss them. Having such conversations should ensure that multiplicity of perspectives is included in the process of co-production [ 31 , 32 ].
The literature relating to the development of quality improvement programmes focuses solely on the changes that emerge from co-production [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 ]. The literature, however, also recommends that the entire development process be documented, including the time spent comparing different visions and the multiple resulting negotiations between the stakeholders involved in the programme [ 25 , 28 , 33 , 35 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. In the area of primary care, there is, to our knowledge, no research which documents the process of co-producing an assessment programme.
The aim of this paper is to describe the process of co-producing the assessment programme currently known as “Développons ensemble la qualité de nos pratiques” (DEQuaP; in English, “Let us develop the quality of our practice together”) intended for community health centres (CHCs; in French maisons médicales ) affiliated to the Federation of Community Health Centres in French-speaking Belgium (FCHC; Fédération des maisons médicales ).
Multidisciplinary practice and a territorial approach are the core components of the primary care model of the CHCs. They are healthcare organizations which develop differently according to the needs, culture and practices of the users’ communities and the geographical, political and organizational landscape in which they exist. This model of primary care organizations aims to provide a more appropriate response to the health and care needs of individuals within their communities, in the context of their daily lives. It aims to provide them with general, lifelong, continuous, comprehensive and integrated support from a team of professionals [ 44 ].
Some of these CHCs are affiliated with the FCHC. Created in 1981, the FCHC represents 130 CHCs in Wallonia and Brussels. The objective of the federation is to promote a primary-care-centred model and to support its affiliated CHCs. In practical terms, the FCHC supports its members with discussion forums, organizational tools, training programmes and actions in line with the FCHC’s values and objectives. It also assists in the creation of CHCs by supporting new teams in their development. Finally, it represents the CHCs in the various healthcare policy instances [ 45 ].
The number of CHCs is increasing as well as their diversity. Although increasing diversification of CHCs is at first sight seen as a potential for quality improvement, it has also seen as a potential risk for the quality of primary care provision [ 46 ]. In our results, we have focused on the way some dimensions of quality of care can be affected by these current challenges in the multidisciplinary primary care landscape. These dimensions refer to accessibility, continuity, efficiency and people-centred care. In a context where CHC is not a protected title, it also represents challenges for the identity of the CHCs affiliated with the FCHC. The FCHC therefore decided to develop an assessment programme, initially called Label, to address quality and identity issues encountered by the FCHC-affiliated CHCs. Using a participatory action research, the initial programme version (as planned by the designers) was abandoned in favour of a new name: DEQuaP. This new name embodies new objectives and new design regarding the assessment programme.
By studying the process of co-producing the assessment programme from Label to DEQuaP, we sought to answer the following research questions: (1) Are there recurring topics of discussion during the co-production of the Label assessment programme which reflect tensions related to assessment? How do the discussions in turn influence the assessment programme’s development from Label to DEQuaP? (2) Does the study of co-production tell us anything about the subject of the assessment, that is, CHCs, and, more generally, about multidisciplinary organizations in primary care? (3) What information does the study of co-production reveal about the assessment of multidisciplinary organizations in primary care?
Using a qualitative approach, our research drew on two sources of data: documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews.
Data collection
First, we conducted documentary research on the co-production of the assessment programme. This first data collection aimed to obtain the story of the development of the assessment programme. A variety of sources were consulted: published and unpublished documents, statements, minutes, activity reports and transcripts of discussions between stakeholders involved in developing the assessment programme.
Second, we carried out nine semi-structured interviews with stakeholders involved in the co-production process: two workers from CHCs involved in the pilot phase (CHC pilot 1 and 2), five designers of the assessment programme working for the FCHC (Designer 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5), and two members of the FCHC (FCHC 1 and 2). Most of the people who had taken an in-depth part in the participatory action research had been interviewed. In addition, recruitment stopped when no additional themes emerged from the analysis. This second data collection aimed to understand their experiences and opinions regarding the assessment programme co-production process in more depth (Table 1 ). Due to the COVID-19 crisis, the interviews were carried out on Zoom. They were carried out between May and August 2020 and lasted an hour on average. The interviewees were given assurance that their answers would be confidential. The interviews were recorded with the consent of each participant.
To broaden our view about the assessment programme co-production and our knowledge of CHCs, we also carried out interviews with professionals working in CHCs (Workers 1–8) as part of another study (Melting Point). This was a qualitative study on the access and use of primary care by vulnerable people in the Brussels Capital Region, commissioned by the Brussels Health and Social Affairs Observatory and supervised by Sophie Thunus [ 43 ].
Data analysis
We used documents to describe the origins of the prototype of the assessment programme and the stages it went through before the final version was implemented. To understand those changes, we analysed the semi-structured interviews with Nvivo 12 qualitative data management software. We shed light on the contrasting reactions of the stakeholders and their positions in favour of and against the assessment programme prototype. It revealed tensions relating to identity as well as to ideological and organizational changes within the Federation’s CHCs. To interpret the tensions discussed during the co-production process, we used the concept of controversy, which has its origin in the sociology of science and technology [ 40 ]. This article employs the term “controversy” to designate collective discussion, carried out using a cross-cutting approach, throughout a process, while drawing on scientific and practical knowledge. Controversies raise moral and ideological considerations that often go beyond the initial subject or, in our case, beyond the methodology [ 41 , 42 ]. Analysis of controversies, in the context of a particular practical situation therefore, makes it possible to identify the strategic and ideological concerns of the stakeholders involved. The last interviews of the Melting Point study helped in seeking a deeper understanding of the essential elements of the controversies.
Ethical approval was obtained from the Hospital Departmental Ethics Committee of Saint-Luc, Catholic University of Louvain, in Brussels. Moreover, the principal researcher, MC, did not contribute to the participatory action research. Her doctoral research began when the assessment programme in its final version (DEQuaP) had already been implemented in the CHCs in 2020.
The results are presented in three sections. First, we describe how the Label assessment programme emerged from the CHCs of French-speaking Belgium. We then present two controversies that arose from the discussions on the development of the programme. Finally, we present the final version of the assessment programme, called DEQuaP, that took shape after the participatory action research.
The creation of the Label assessment programme
The diversity of CHCs in French-speaking Belgium is increasing as they grow in number. Some professionals working in CHCs of the FCHC fear that the quality of multidisciplinary organizations may suffer as diversity increases. As explained below, the assessment programme was initially developed as a way of responding to those concerns.
The diversification of community health centres
For several years, the landscape of primary care in French-speaking Belgium has been marked by an increase in multidisciplinary organizations, mostly known as CHCs. Although these organizations all offer multidisciplinary services, the way they provide them increasingly differs from centre to centre. CHCs vary in size, and the teams often incorporate different disciplines. Within teams, the division of work varies. For example, some CHCs delegate certain tasks normally carried out by general physicians, such as monitoring treatment for diabetes or blood thinners, vaccines, screening, etc., to nurses. There are also differences in values and priorities. Some organizations value patient participation, and others health promotion or the welfare of workers, and so on. The approach to social and health objectives varies considerably from one CHC to another. For example, tapering plans for drug users are not offered by all CHCs: some supply substitution products, whereas others do not and instead encourage abstinence. There are two models of payment in CHCs: fee-for-service and the capitation fee programme, whereby the National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance pays the CHCs a fixed contribution every month per registered patient. The CHCs register patients and, through their multidisciplinary teams, provide them with preventive and curative care without a personal financial contribution at the point of contact. CHCs can join federations, of which there are now several, including the FCHC, which is the biggest and oldest federation. Members of the FCHC must abide by a list of criteria that includes values, targets and methods, which are set out in a charter. An increasing number of CHCs, however, are choosing to join other federations or not to join one at all: “ In total, there are 180 structures using a capitation fee, of which 120 are FCHC, plus 60 others. Some of them belong to another federation, which is currently very small but is gaining ground, and then there are many others that are not members of any federation ” (Worker 1).
The challenges posed by the increasing diversity of community health centres
One of the initial goals of the assessment programme was to demonstrate to users, health professionals and their networks, as well as to the public authorities, the added value of FCHC-affiliated CHCs: “ The public authorities and other stakeholders in the world outside are asking us what the added value of a community health centre is ” (Designer 4). Although increasing diversification of CHCs is, at first sight, seen as a chance for quality improvement, for some members of the FCHC, which pioneered the development of CHCs in Belgium, it also seen as a potential risk for the quality of primary care provision. More specifically, for some respondents, the quality dimensions and values of certain CHCs (whether or not they are affiliated with the FCHC) are moving away from those that were generally accepted when CHCs were created in the 1970s, such as accessibility, continuity, efficiency and people-centred care: “ In general, these are people who do not subscribe to the charter of community health centres and who therefore do not want to defend what they stand for: social justice, equality, solidarity, accessibility of care, etc .” (Worker 1). Regarding accessibility, it is often undermined by the failure of some CHCs to offer services with flexible hours: “ What I began to see was that some community health centres arranged things for their own convenience to the detriment of accessibility, for example, stating they were open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. with an hour’s lunch break ” (Designer 4). Some professionals fear, therefore, that the personal interest of the service workers in such organizations might take precedence over the interests of the users: “ People focus too much on defending workers’ rights and not enough on what we are doing for the patients and for society in general ” (Worker 2). They also fear that there may be a move away from the capitation fee model, currently considered the ideal method, towards a more liberal, business-oriented approach: “ It’s becoming clear that an increasing number of practices that I would deem more commercial are creeping into the capitation fee programme, in order to create a more financially advantageous model ” (FCHC 1). Such organizations are seen as being based on more liberal values, to the extent that participants consider some practices and ways of operating to no longer be justifiable: “ Some of these new organizations do an excellent job but others are veering off course ” (Worker 1). Some professionals claim that unjustifiable practices have already been observed in structures where financial interest takes precedence. One example is registering patients according to social and health criteria and prioritizing the “least sick” and “least poor”: “ It’s also very easy to cheat with fee-for-service, but how do you do that in the capitation fee model? You select people, you only take on those who aren’t that sick, which means you get a lot of money for doing nothing. You could end up with 6000 patients on your book s” (Worker 1). All these issues could come into conflict with a patient-centred approach, a sub-dimension of quality of care. With regard to continuity issues, professionals have also observed excessive referrals to secondary care by CHCs working with the capitation fee model, motivated by financial interest: “ If I see someone come in with something a bit complicated, if I want to increase my profit proportionally, I have to reduce my workload. So, I pass them on to secondary care. For example, if I get someone who’s depressed and I want to find out why, that takes a lot longer than prescribing drugs ” (FCHC 1).
Issues of maintaining quality in a situation where centres are increasingly diverse arise in a context in which “ community health centre ” is not a protected title. At the moment, CHCs define any practice working with the capitation fee model as primary care. Another risk flagged by the FCHC workers is confusion about goals and methods in all organizations known as CHCs: “The situation is very muddled since some community health centres have developed independently. Some people use the term " community health centre’ across the board, in the media, whether or not the term is appropriate ” (Worker 1). The generalized use of this term, irrespective of whether community health centres subscribe to the vision of those affiliated to the FCHC, has led some professionals who are members of the Federation to advertise how their practices differ from those of other groups which use the same name, but are different in several respects: “ The way the name ‘community health centre’ was abused, at least in our opinion, raised a huge number of questions. We need a clear set of guidelines if we don’t want to risk damaging the capitation model and penalizing the centres that are doing things properly ” (FCHC 1).
The second objective of the assessment programme is to identify how the CHCs of the FCHC define themselves internally and how they determine the quality of their care. This objective relates to the FCHC’s control over its members. Despite the increase in membership, its power and knowledge of what members do is diminishing: “ At first there weren’t many [community health centres]; everyone knew everyone and they were all activists to some degree. Now there are 120 centres, some of which we never see, nor do we know what they do ” (CHC pilot 2). This objective has to be seen in the context of a lack of monitoring of the affiliated health centres: “ The FCHC can’t control the community health centres. We don’t have the power to go and inspect them either, or to force them to do anything ” (Worker 1).
The initial version of the assessment programme
A prototype of the assessment programme was made in 2013 to obtain funding to develop it. The initial prototype proposed by the FCHC was called Label and was based on a self-assessment method for which the CHC teams were responsible. It was based on indicators that reflected the membership criteria of the FCHC. A form of official and visible recognition (a quality label) was to be given to participating organizations. Initially, the self-assessment method was to be overseen by an external third party and an examining committee responsible for the external assessment procedure, that is, the awarding of the Label, which would be valid for 3 years. The committee would have to be an independent body but work closely with the FCHC. Figure 2 presents an overview of this first version of the assessment programme.
The co-production process aimed to clarify the content, such as quality and identity criteria and dimensions of the CHCs, and the form of the assessment programme by involving CHC professionals and users. The assessment programme co-production process lasted 5 years, from 2013 to 2018, and involved three successive phases, as illustrated in Fig. 1 : a phase of literature research and consultation of CHC’s professionals and users, a phase of co-constructing the assessment programme and a phase of testing and revision. Several activities took place during each of the three phases in the development of the assessment programme, with varying degrees of involvement of the professionals, from consultation (phase 1) to collaboration (phases 2 and 3) [ 47 ].
The three phases of the participatory action research of the co-production of the assessment programme
Controversies during the discussions on the development of the assessment programme
The presentation of the prototype of the assessment programme to the professionals of the CHCs in the FCHC gave rise to a series of controversies due to a range of different reactions: “ Everyone took this project as an opportunity to try to promote their own goals. Priorities differ from one person to the next ” (FCHC 1). The controversies arose in two mutually interacting areas: the desired degree of variety in the organizations, practices and forms of commitment of the CHCs affiliated to the FCHC and the division of powers within the FCHC and its missions as the representative body.
How much variety should there be in the organizations, practice and advocacy of community health centres?
The discussions about the objectives of the assessment programme revealed an initial controversy regarding the desired degree of variety within the FCHC-affiliated CHCs about organizations, practices and the forms of advocacy the FCHC aspires to. Two conflicting points of view emerged among FCHC professionals: one group was in favour of variety among FCHC-affiliated CHCs and another was in favour of a single standard: “ Some people want there to be a lot of us, to increase the movement’s size and open it up to a greater number of practices, even if they are not entirely on the same course, whereas others prefer a purist approach for the sake of consistency ” (Designer 1).
The position of CHC professionals who favour variety is based on four arguments. First, CHCs need to be able to adapt to the social context of their territory and the needs of care users: “ Our customers are changing, the population is getting poorer and health problems are changing ” (CHC pilot 1). Adaptation to the sociology of a territory, in which the needs of the population are constantly evolving, also requires the professionals working there to diversify their practice: “ We need to be open to forms of practice which are slightly different to those historically developed by community health centres because the world is changing, health professionals are changing, and you need to be open to different practices ” (FCHC 2). According to the same professionals, the FCHC must also open up to forms of advocacy other than those it engaged with when it was first set up because the reasons that professionals work in CHCs have changed in recent years: “ The core main motives of our predecessors and the motives which now lead people to work in community health centres are often very different. Today, there are many young professionals taking jobs in health centres because they like the local project, they like teamwork, but not because they want to change society ” (Worker 2). Finally, the professionals invoke a fourth argument: that variety in CHCs can raise political visibility. The question of how aware public authorities are of the CHCs and the latter’s power to influence health policy depends on the size of the Federation: “ The more of us there are, the greater our political influence; if we end up being a small federation with a handful of community health centres, we will lose all credibility ” (FCHC 2). In light of these arguments, according to these stakeholders, the variety must be reflected in a broadening of FCHC membership criteria: “ Some people are more for openness, saying we need to be open to forms of practice that are a little different to those traditionally followed by community health centres ” (FCHC 2).
On the fringes of the position in favour of variety, which seems to be the majority view, CHC workers deemed to be so-called purists by some professionals (FCHC 2) want to hold onto a strong common identity within the movement. They are calling for greater standardization of the FCHC-affiliated CHCs: “ It’s difficult for the older generation to give up this pure identity ” (Designer 4). These professionals attach importance to continued political activism with respect to the FCHC membership criteria: “ When all the veterans have gone, what then? I don’t want to be pessimistic, but we’ll have lost something all the same. Will things go on as usual? I don’t know ” (Worker 8). According to these professionals, if the commitment to political activism is no longer a key value of the FCHC, there is a risk that no one will defend the CHC model to the public authorities: “ There was a young upcoming generation, 20–25 years old, with their ideas and a message of good news, ready to take over in case the movement lost its way ” (Designer 4). Fears that were raised included a loss of protection for users’ interests, which lay at the heart of the FCHC when it was created and underpinned the commitment of many service providers when the first CHCs were set up in the 1990s: “ [This health care model] sometimes seems to attract young health professionals who want to join community health centres; they recognize their value, but to claim that there is an underlying health model people want to defend, but which not all politicians defend, no one really cares or wants to get involved ” (CHC pilot 2).
The position of the stakeholders regarding the acceptable degree of variety in CHCs had consequences for the way the initial version of the assessment programme, called Label, was perceived. From the point of view of those in favour of diversity, applying the Label assessment programme to CHCs would lead to more stringent FCHC membership criteria and a possible drop in membership to the benefit of other federations, thereby compromising the FCHC in the eyes of the public: “ Is it better to remain a small federation which closes ranks, with a strong restrictive identity, at the risk that all the other centres join different federations? ” (Designer 4). Another risk linked to the initial version of the assessment programme (based on an assessment method common to all CHCs) is that it may penalize adaptation to circumstances or even reduce the ability of the organizations to adjust to the context they find themselves in. Some professionals, therefore, point to a mismatch between a method common to all the CHCs and the many different environments they work in: “ It is not possible to have the same programme in all the community health centres because we’re all different, working in different contexts. We have a huge variety of health centres; no two centres are the same ” (Worker 6). Those stakeholders also fear that the assessment programme could interfere with their professional practices, which are unavoidably linked to the environment they work in and are therefore constantly evolving. From the point of view of those who advocate standardizing the CHC members of the FCHC, the assessment programme is sometimes considered a mainstay, or even a shield against the pressures to diversify the FCHC-affiliated CHCs: “ They saw it [the Label assessment programme] as an opportunity for an overhaul, to force certain health centres to improve their practice ” (Designer 1).
What kind of federation do community health centres need?
The approach to assessment proposed by the FCHC for its CHCs also gave rise to a second controversy regarding both the division of power within the FCHC and the missions of the FCHC, which we will study as an organizational controversy.
On the one hand, when analysing the positions regarding the role of the FCHC within the Label assessment programme, we noticed two types of logic with respect to the division of power within the FCHC: a centralized logic and a decentralized one. Some professionals thus favour a federation that takes charge of ensuring that CHCs continue to respect the membership criteria: they call for a centralized division of power. They also saw the assessment programme as an opportunity to confer this role upon the federation: “ There were teams that wanted to use this thing to have a clear-out, to get rid of any teams which they felt weren’t working properly ” (Designer 1). On the other hand, other professionals were in favour of autonomous practices and ways of working, involving complete independence vis à vis the Federation, that is, decentralized power. Those defending this position often felt that the FCHC was too controlling: “ Community health centres have the impression that the FCHC wants to force certain choices upon them, that we want to go and see what they’re up to, to stick our nose into their business ” (Designer 1). Consequently, these professionals strongly opposed the Label assessment programme: “ This was, at least at first, their [the professionals’] experience of the project. They were asking: “What is this FCHC which is sticking its nose into our business and assessing how we work, telling us if we’re doing things right or not? ” (Designer 1). They saw it as a threat to their professional autonomy and believed it demonstrated a lack of consideration and trust on the part of the federation towards its members: “ The community health centres saw us [the FCHC] as the eye of Moscow ” (Designer 2).
The professionals working in CHCs also disagreed on the missions of the FCHC as the representative body. On the one hand, for some professionals, the main objective of the FCHC was to engage in political advocacy by promoting health policy based on a programme organized around primary care: “ Some of them [the health centres] are politically very committed and want that approach to be the main focus of the federation’s work ” (Designer 1). On the other hand, other professionals called for the federation to give more support to the development of multidisciplinary group practice focused on public and community health: “ There are others who believe that the community health centres and their federation should not be politicized at all, in the sense of having a political agend a” (Designer 1). Other professionals qualified this sentiment by stating that, although it is important to defend the primary health care model, it should no longer be given priority in the federation’s political advocacy: “ I think the FCHC should reflect people’s expectations of our practices. I’d rather have a dialogue about our needs, focusing on the local community ” (Worker 7).
Version 2.0 of the assessment programme: Label becomes DEQuaP
The identity and organizational controversies raised by the development of the assessment programme Label have led to contrasting reactions to it. Having opted for participatory action research to develop the assessment programme, the designers stressed the importance of adapting it to the empirical reality, the reality of the field: “ We opted for a highly participatory methodology in order to ensure ownership by the field, but also to develop a tool and an approach that were really in tune with the needs of the CHCs. This choice proved to be highly relevant . This methodology produces rich material and enables workers and patients to get involved concretely and propose orientations that are better suited to the different contexts of CHCs ” (Designer 1). The contrasting discussions and exchanges during the participatory action research thus led the designers to make major changes in the Label assessment programme: “ We changed the direction of the project after the initial investigations: a balance was found between all points of view ” (Designer 3). Changes were made to the objective, name and design of the assessment programme. Figure 2 shows an overview of this second version of the assessment programme and the differences from the first.
Identity card of the two versions of the assessment programme and evolution of the name, objectives and design through the participatory action research (PAR)
Firstly, the designers realized that it was necessary to redefine the objective, at the risk of killing the whole programme. In this view, the “identity objective”, which is protecting the FCHC’s CHCs from the competition resulting from the increasing supply of primary care organizations, was a challenge that went beyond the constraints of the Label assessment programme: “ We wasted time mixing up quality and identity, when in fact the two issues are quite different. Trying to work on both aspects simultaneously was excessive and contradictory. We ran the risk of killing off the desire to improve quality by pasting the Label over the membership criteria ” (Designer 5). The quality improvement objective was therefore selected, and inviting the multidisciplinary teams to reflect on their practices and on the way their CHCs were organized became therefore the only goal of the assessment programme. The focus was placed on enhancing the culture of quality in the CHCs, to demystify the assessment process: “ The strategy we had defined was to make everyone comfortable with this assessment challenge which was not part of the culture ” (Designer 4).
Then, following a change of goal, discussions began about changing the name of the assessment programme to make it more specific and to reduce its ambiguity: “ The name caused confusion and some people wanted it changed to better reflect the purpose of the assessment programm e” (Designer 4). The designers felt that the new name chosen for the assessment programme, Développons ensemble la qualité de nos pratiques (DEQuaP; in English, “Let us develop the quality of our practice together”), better reflected the intention of instigating a culture of formative assessment based on the process and not exclusively on measuring results: “ The term ‘Label’ emphasized something we had abandoned, that is the awarding of a label. We looked for a name which reflected what we were creating ” (Designer 5).
Finally, the initial design of the self-assessment method was reworked to better reflect its objective. On the one hand, the quality indicators were replaced by open questions that the multidisciplinary teams were invited to discuss: “ Teams pointed out that it was more appropriate to use questions rather than statements to be endorsed or criticized. Assertions have a normative character, while questions are more stimulating in terms of dynamics. Moreover, if you place too much emphasis on indicators there is a risk that rigid rules might kill creativity. We must avoid indicators that dictate only one way of doing things. What we propose is completely different – a framework, a way of working ” (Designer 5). On the other hand, the idea of a committee to award the label has been abandoned: “ In another context, we could have come up with a different approach where we would define criteria or even standards to be but we don’t have that kind of relationship with our members. Our emphasis is more on the independence of our centres ” (Designer 5).
The development of the assessment programme initially called Label was planned during the co-production process, which was intended to encourage the involvement of the relevant stakeholders and subsequently their support for assessment [ 17 , 18 ]. Although the literature highlights the importance of involving the participants in the development of quality improvement programmes, there are very few studies on this phase of co-production. Instead, previous studies have focused on results [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 ].
We chose to concentrate on the process of developing an assessment programme for CHCs and to examine the discussion points it raised. In response to our first research question, we identified discussion points incorporating aspects of identity and organization. These related to the subject of the assessment rather than to the development of the method itself appeared to be recurring. We sorted them into two controversies [ 41 , 42 ].
The first controversy concerned the degree of variety desired by the group made up of CHCs, the FCHC. This controversy calls the collective identity of the FCHC into question. The points of view reported in our results reveal the two main identities under discussion. Some professionals wanted the CHCs to be open to a variety of organizations, practices and forms of advocacy. They believed that this openness would lead to a broadening of the federation’s membership criteria and an eventual increase in the number of affiliated organizations. Other professionals wanted the CHCs in the FCHC to have a stronger single identity. They believed that an increase in the number of organizations entails a major risk of weakening their visibility on the political stage. Moreover, they saw this “identity hybridization” [ 45 ] as likely to dilute their values, such as the activist ideology that characterized the creation of the first CHCs in the 1970s.
The second controversy concerns the organization of the FCHC in its capacity as a federation. This second so-called organizational controversy revolves around two issues: the division of power and the federation’s mission as a representative body. Internally, the desired degrees of (de)centralization of power vis-à-vis its member CHCs lie on a continuum between FCHC control over the members and their total autonomy. Externally, the role conferred upon the FCHC in its public relations is either that of politically defending the ideological model of a community health centre or supporting and developing multidisciplinary primary care practices.
By addressing these controversies, we demonstrated that, during the co-production process, the reasons for developing the method had been progressively overshadowed by the organizational diagnosis of the CHCs and their federation. The first lesson learned from the analysis of this process of co-production is therefore that diagnosis should precede the development of assessment programmes. As the sociology of science and technology and implementation science have shown, it is vital to incorporate the characteristics of the context for which it is intended into the assessment programme [ 48 , 49 ]. Without an initial diagnosis, there is a risk that the development of the programme will be overshadowed by controversies that create a confused situation, thus affecting its future implementation [ 50 , 51 ]. In the case that we analysed, the issues were so muddled that the designers of the assessment programme had to change the goals and the design, as well as change its name. The new version incorporated the results of the diagnosis so that the assessment programme was better suited to the reality of the environment in which it was to be implemented.
The organizational diagnosis of the FCHC, which was a by-product of the development of the assessment programme, provided information about the context in which the programme was developed, thus providing an answer to the second research question: Does the study of co-production tell us anything about the subject of the assessment itself, that is, the CHCs, and, more generally, about multidisciplinary primary care organizations?
On the one hand, we showed how assessment means different things to different stakeholders. Our results demonstrate that the objectives of the assessment programme are broader than pure assessment and also include strategic and political goals. In the case studied, we could liken the objectives to the desire to introduce an authorization to practice as a community health centre, in a context of increasing diversity, which threatens the foundations of the original concept. The authorization programme, which has been studied in depth in the sociology of professions [ 52 , 53 , 54 ], presupposes the existence of a professional movement whose representatives can present a strong single identity to the relevant authorities [ 55 ]. In the case we studied, however, we showed that the identity of the CHCs as part of the FCHC was in dispute, as was the role of their representatives. As a result, they do not have the same vision of what needs to be done to protect it, which may explain the contrasting reactions to the assessment programme.
On the other hand, sorting the points of discussion which arose during the development of the assessment programme into different controversies revealed groups of CHCs based on their individual and collective identities and on the way the FCHC itself was organized. From an analytical point of view, these clusters could prefigure the development of what Bucher and Strauss called “professional segments” to describe the formation of sub-groups within professions based on professionals’ practical, theoretical, and methodological preferences [ 56 ].
We propose to borrow the concept from these authors to describe the contrasting positions among professionals within the FCHC-affiliated CHCs regarding the identity and central organizing principles of the FCHC. As illustrated in Fig. 3 , the controversies reveal the existence of two professional segments that, in this paper, we will call “political professionalism” and “pragmatic professionalism”. Each of these segments used the development of the assessment programme to emphasize its concerns by disputing – sometimes strongly, sometimes less so – the identity and thus the legitimacy of the opposing segment.
Contours of professional segments called “political professionalism” and “pragmatic professionalism”. On the orange axis: the position relative to the organization of the FCHC; on the blue axis: the position relative to the degree of variety considered desirable within the FCHC
The professionals we have associated with the political professionalism segment have at the core of their professional commitment an ideology based on a societal transformation project. That ideology is manifested through activism, philosophy and the organization of work. Consequently, they favour a federation that champions that way of operating by ensuring homogeneity among affiliated CHCs (Fig. 3 ). This political professionalism can be traced back to the birth of CHCs.
Born in the wake of May 1968, the first CHCs employed professionals who were committed to reforming medicine by replacing the bio-medical, single-practitioner, hospital-centred model with a new social, accessible, local model which would encourage primary multidisciplinary care practices. The professionals who worked in the first such multidisciplinary organizations were therefore general physicians and nurses who wanted to see a thorough reform of medical practice, and who sometimes risked their professional mandates for this political cause [ 57 ]. Political activism, fundamental to their struggle from the start, therefore became a principle which the Federation, set up in 1981, applied to all its affiliated health centres and set out explicitly in the membership rules: “ From 1980 onwards, an article in the statutes of the Federation stipulates that the members of the Federation shall commit to a social struggle for health ” [ 45 ]. That commitment takes the form of awareness raising.
The professionals associated with the pragmatic professionalism segment see the CHC legacy of advocacy differently. They favour a form of advocacy characterized by a less politicized and more localized professional commitment. They mobilize intermittently around specific issues related to the specificities of their own CHCs [ 58 , 59 ]. Consequently, their advocacy differs in form and scope from one temporal and geographical context to another, based on the sociological realities of CHCs. This more context-driven approach calls for greater heterogeneity within the FCHC and accepts a greater degree of autonomy for FCHC-affiliated CHCs (Fig. 3 ). This approach favours a federation that focuses on contextualized realities rather than on an activist role of transforming society.
The power dynamics between these two segments, evident in the controversies that arose during the development of the assessment programme provide valuable insights into the evolution of multidisciplinary practices in primary care. They reflect the current coexistence of political and pragmatic professionalism within those organizations [ 58 ].
This coexistence raises real issues, as illustrated in our controversies. Differentiation in the form and extent of activism is sometimes associated by professionals with an abandonment of commitment [ 58 , 59 ]. More a modification of these forms than an abandonment of commitment, the challenge of this evolution in the landscape of primary care organizations therefore seems to be able to find the right balance between the CHCs’ identities and collective organization. It would simultaneously allow them to cater for the many realities of multidisciplinary primary care organizations and act as a safeguard to avoid the excesses described in our results.
Consequently, this need for balance raised by the challenges of changing forms of professionalism leads us to question how we can conceptualize assessment of multidisciplinary organizations in primary care that takes this into account. The use of standardized quality indicators for all of these multidisciplinary practices in primary care does not fully consider the contextualized and diversified nature of multidisciplinary organizations in primary care; these indicators are regularly criticized for being based on a reductive vision of the realities of the social and health services these centres provide [ 29 , 60 , 61 , 62 ]. Furthermore, the current highly formalized approach to assessment may lead professionals to understate certain topics, such as their commitment, which reduces the practical relevance of the assessment [ 40 ].
In response to our third research question, we encourage the development of assessment methods which offer professionals the opportunity to reflect dynamically on their practices, including their commitment. In this context, other ways of assessing work, such as the inclusion of qualitative arguments (allowing subjective assessments) seem worth exploring when assessing the quality of multidisciplinary organizations in primary care. This does not mean that quantitative indicators should be discarded, but they must not be used exclusively; other considerations, based on listening to professionals, should be considered [ 63 ]. We therefore suggest developing and strengthening reflective practices to improve the quality of primary care organizations. These practices offer a twofold opportunity: on the one hand, to give recognition to the pragmatic dimension of professional commitment, care, activities and services and, on the other hand, to offer a means of (re)defining homogeneous integrating principles between professionals in the same organizations and between multidisciplinary primary care organizations. Future research could contribute to demonstrating the added value of qualitative assessment methods in the context of multidisciplinary organizations in primary care and facilitate their development.
Reflecting on the design and content of assessments for the quality of multidisciplinary organizations in primary care also necessitates consideration of how these evaluations are developed. The literature emphasizes professionals’ resistance to quality improvement processes such as assessment, impacting their implementation and outcomes [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. This resistance is often attributed to a lack of consideration for the realities of the field and the professionals who are the future beneficiaries or users of these quality improvement tools [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. Integrating multiple perspectives to bridge the gap between research and users is the focus of the co-production approach [ 21 ]. In the development of the assessment programme Label, the designers chose to incorporate these perspectives through participatory action research. Stakeholders, including professionals from CHCs, FCHC workers and CHC’s users, were thus engaged throughout the participatory action research, participating in various activities that facilitated the sharing of views and concerns related to identity and quality issues regarding CHC’s FCHC. Service co-production is becoming increasingly important in healthcare development, and healthcare organizations are expected to involve relevant microsystems in quality improvement interventions. Although this approach is strongly recommended in the field of quality improvement [ 22 ], few studies report on what transpired among stakeholders in quality improvement intervention co-production process [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. Given the literature’s reports of negative reactions to quality improvement programmes [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ], there appears to be a lingering prevalence of tools designed by a top–down approach, without any consultation of future users.
Although co-production processes are experiencing significant growth in the development of healthcare interventions, some of these processes fail. Cooke and Kothari [ 64 ] define the co-production approach as tyrannical because it can reinforce the problems it was designed to solve. Power dynamics constitute an overarching and fundamental problem for the outcomes of co-production [ 65 , 66 ]. Disparities in power commonly exist between scientific experts and other stakeholders, including professionals, as well as citizens. Literature on co-production underscores that elite actors, such as scientists, possess more time and resources and have more knowledge and skills. For all these reasons, they are often considered to be better able to articulate a contribution that is considered relevant and important. In such context, individuals with power can leverage the co-production process to their advantage, shaping the co-production process as they want. This power dynamic impacts the co-production outcome’s quality, utility and legitimacy because those who have power are less likely to result in solutions that resonate with and are usable for non-elite groups [ 65 , 66 ]. However, in our case study, the outcome of the participatory action research, namely the changes made from Label to DEQuaP, indicates the importance of controversies in reframing the co-production process that finally makes room for recognizing the power and relevance of all stakeholders in the participatory action research. Our results show that the designers of the assessment programme allowed real changes to the way that they had planned the initial version of the assessment programme. The exchange and discussions during the participatory action research encouraged all stakeholders to express themselves, even if they were in opposition to the initial version. Moreover, our case suggests that the culture of the field facilitates such a balanced approach to co-production. Indeed, shared power is inherent to the self-management DNA, participative culture and equity value present within the CHCs of the FCHC. Finally, the adaptations made in the programme studied in this paper suggest that a co-production process based on horizontal rather than hierarchical relationships can help address issues that would could otherwise endanger a whole programme, such as the ambiguity of objectives, which is an important obstacle in the implementation of contemporary, participatory health programmes and policies between all stakeholders implied [ 66 ]. In this respect and following Turnhout and colleagues, our paper highlights the importance of shifting from a framework characterized by “power-over” dynamics to a paradigm of “power-with”, where all stakeholders are empowered to generate ideas [ 66 , 67 ]. In addition, it highlights the importance of contestation and tensions, studied as controversies in our paper, to develop useful interventions [ 65 , 66 ]. It requires open communication between stakeholders where contestation of interests, differences and potential conflicts can be expressed and considered [ 65 , 66 ].
Strengths and limitations
Our paper has some limitations. The assessment programme was developed from 2013 to 2018. Our qualitative interviews were conducted in 2020. There is therefore a risk of memory bias. We also limited ourselves to the French-speaking Belgium FCHC. The scope of the results is therefore limited to the organizations we studied. However, given the transversal nature of the object of study, such as assessment programmes, we believe that the results are relevant to thinking about assessment in other types of organization, in particular primary care and multidisciplinary organizations.
By studying the co-production process of an assessment programme, this study sheds light on the identity, organization and assessment of community health centres in French-speaking Belgium. Initially designed to develop an assessment programme, the co-production process was subsumed by an organizational diagnosis of these multidisciplinary primary care organizations. This diagnosis highlighted controversies over identity and organization among professionals, which impacted the development of the assessment programme. In light of these controversies, which highlight current professional and societal developments, healthcare organizations should take the time to redefine their identity and structure, and public authorities should support the development of assessment methods that complement existing ones.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets used and analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Abbreviations
- Community health centres
Lets us develop the quality of our practices [in French: Développons ensemble la qualité de nos pratiques]
Federation of Community Health Centres
Starfield B, Shi L, Macinko J. Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Milbank Q. 2005;83(3):457–502.
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Allen LN, Barkley S, De Maeseneer J, van Weel C, Kluge H, de Wit N, et al. Unfulfilled potential of primary care in Europe. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 2018;363: k4469.
Article Google Scholar
Macarayan EK, Gage AD, Doubova SV, Guanais F, Lemango ET, Ndiaye Y, et al. Assessment of quality of primary care with facility surveys: a descriptive analysis in ten low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet Global Health. 2018;6(11):e1176–85.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Fracolli LA, Gomes MF, Nabão FR, Santos MS, Cappellini VK, de Almeida AC. Primary health care assessment tools: a literature review and metasynthesis. Cien Saude Colet. 2014;19(12):4851–60.
Rezapour R, Letaief M, Khosravi A, Farahbakhsh M, Ahmadnezhad E, Azami-Aghdash S, et al. Primary health care quality assessment frameworks: state of the art review. Health Scope. 2022;11(3): e126407.
Katoue MG, Somerville SG, Barake R, Scott M. The perceptions of healthcare professionals about accreditation and its impact on quality of healthcare in Kuwait: a qualitative study. J Eval Clin Pract. 2021;27(6):1310–20.
Bose S, Oliveras E, Edson WNE. How can self-assessment improve the quality of healthcare. Opera Res. 2001;2(4):1–27.
Google Scholar
Kousgaard MB, Thorsen T, Due TD. Experiences of accreditation impact in general practice – a qualitative study among general practitioners and their staff. BMC Fam Pract. 2019;20(1):146.
Due TD, Thorsen T, Kousgaard MB. Understanding accreditation standards in general practice – a qualitative study. BMC Fam Pract. 2019;20(1):23.
Waldorff FB, Nicolaisdóttir DR, Kousgaard MB, Reventlow S, Søndergaard J, Thorsen T, et al. Almost half of the Danish general practitioners have negative a priori attitudes towards a mandatory accreditation programme. Danish Med J. 2016;63(9):A5266.
Debono D, Greenfield D, Testa L, Mumford V, Hogden A, Pawsey M, et al. Understanding stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences of general practice accreditation. Health Policy. 2017;121(7):816–22.
Bechar S, Mero-Jaffe I. Who is afraid of evaluation? Ethics in evaluation research as a way to cope with excessive evaluation anxiety: insights from a case study. Am J Eval. 2013;35:364–76.
Brewster L, Aveling E-L, Martin G, Tarrant C, Dixon-Woods M. What to expect when you’re evaluating healthcare improvement: a concordat approach to managing collaboration and uncomfortable realities. BMJ Qual Safety. 2015;24:318–24.
Knai C, Nolte E, Brunn M, Elissen A, Conklin A, Pedersen JP, et al. Reported barriers to evaluation in chronic care: experiences in six European countries. Health Policy. 2013;110(2–3):220–8.
Bloy G, Rigal L. With tact and measure? French doctors wrestling with the idea of assessing their medical practice. Sociol Travail. 2013;55(1):24–47.
Stevahn L, King JA. Managing conflict constructively in program evaluation. Evaluation. 2005;11(4):415–27.
Colquhoun HL, Squires JE, Kolehmainen N, Fraser C, Grimshaw JM. Methods for designing interventions to change healthcare professionals’ behaviour: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):30.
Croot L, O’Cathain A, Sworn K, Yardley L, Turner K, Duncan E, et al. Developing interventions to improve health: a systematic mapping review of international practice between 2015 and 2016. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2019;5(1):127.
Cornwall A. Buzzwords and fuzzwords: deconstructing development discourse. Dev Pract. 2007;17(4–5):471–84.
Lawrence LM, Bishop A, Curran J. Integrated knowledge translation with public health policy makers: a scoping review. Healthc Policy. 2019;14(3):55–77.
PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Vat LE, Finlay T, Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar T, Fahy N, Robinson P, Boudes M, et al. Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: a literature review. Health Expect. 2020;23(1):5–18.
Jasanoff S. States of knowledge: the co-production of science and social order. London: Routledge; 2004.
Book Google Scholar
Ramaswamy R, Reed J, Livesley N, Boguslavsky V, Garcia-Elorrio E, Sax S, et al. Unpacking the black box of improvement. Int J Qual Health Care. 2018;30(Suppl_1):15–9.
Turner KM, Rousseau N, Croot L, Duncan E, Yardley L, O’Cathain A, et al. Understanding successful development of complex health and healthcare interventions and its drivers from the perspective of developers and wider stakeholders: an international qualitative interview study. BMJ Open. 2019;9(5): e028756.
Duncan E, O’Cathain A, Rousseau N, Croot L, Sworn K, Turner KM, et al. Guidance for reporting intervention development studies in health research (GUIDED): an evidence-based consensus study. BMJ Open. 2020;10(4): e033516.
Lam CY, Shulha LM. Insights on using developmental evaluation for innovating: a case study on the cocreation of an innovative program. Am J Eval. 2015;36(3):358–74.
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 2008;337: a1655.
Sharkey S, Sharples A. From the beginning: negotiation in community evaluation. Evaluation. 2008;14(3):363–80.
La SM. qualité des soins, nouveau paradigme de l’action collective? [Quality of care, a new paradigm for collective action?]. Sociol Travail. 2000;42(1):51–68.
Article MathSciNet Google Scholar
Hawkins J, Madden K, Fletcher A, Midgley L, Grant A, Cox G, et al. Development of a framework for the co-production and prototyping of public health interventions. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):689.
Lemieux C. À quoi sert l’analyse des controverses ? [in French]. Mil neuf cent Revue d’histoire intellectuelle. 2007;25(1):191–212.
Cooke J, Mawson S. Working with knowledge users: 3.1 working with knowledge users. Amsterdam: Wiley; 2022. p. 74–90.
Staley K, Barron D. Learning as an outcome of involvement in research: what are the implications for practice, reporting and evaluation? Res Involv Engage. 2019;5:14.
Hoekstra F, Mrklas KJ, Khan M, McKay RC, Vis-Dunbar M, Sibley KM, et al. A review of reviews on principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts of research partnerships approaches: a first step in synthesising the research partnership literature. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020;18(1):51.
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Slattery P, Saeri AK, Bragge P. Research co-design in health: a rapid overview of reviews. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020;18(1):17.
Staniszewska S, Brett J, Simera I, Seers K, Mockford C, Goodlad S, et al. GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 2017;358: j3453.
Article CAS Google Scholar
Kendall C, Fitzgerald M, Kang RS, Wong ST, Katz A, Fortin M, et al. “Still learning and evolving in our approaches”: patient and stakeholder engagement among Canadian community-based primary health care researchers. Res Involve Engage. 2018;4:47.
Brett J, Staniszewska S, Mockford C, Herron-Marx S, Hughes J, Tysall C, et al. Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review. Health Expect. 2014;17(5):637–50.
Conklin A, Morris Z, Nolte E. What is the evidence base for public involvement in health-care policy?: results of a systematic scoping review. Health Expect. 2015;18(2):153–65.
Benamouzig D. L’évaluation des aspects sociaux en santé. La formation d’une expertise sociologique à la Haute Autorité de santé [in French]. Revue française des Affaires sociales. 2010;1:187–211.
Hoddinott P. A new era for intervention development studies. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2015;1(1):36.
Scholz B, Bevan A. Toward more mindful reporting of patient and public involvement in healthcare. Res Involve Engage. 2021;7(1):61.
Savoie-Zajc L. Du déroulement évolutif de la recherche-action au format linéaire l’écriture : quelques défis dans la rédaction et la diffusion de la recherche-action [in French]. Recherches Qualitatives. 2012:73–89.
Shekelle PG, Begashaw M. What are the effects of different team-based primary care structures on the quadruple aim of care? A rapid review. Washington (DC): Department of Veterans Affairs (US); 2021.
Hendrick A, Moreau J. De A à Z, histoire(s) du mouvement des maisons médicales [in French]. Santé conjuguée. 2022;98.
Thunus S, Creten A, Donnen A, Walker Carole. Melting Point : L’accès et le recours aux soins de première ligne par les publics vulnérables, en Région de Bruxelles-Capitale [in French]. Observatoire de la Santé et du Social de Bruxelles-capitale; 2023.
Hughes M, Duffy C. Public involvement in health and social sciences research: a concept analysis. Health Expect. 2018;21(6):1183–90.
Law J. On the methods of long-distance control: vessels, navigation and the Portuguese route to India. Sociol Rev. 1984;32(S1):234–63.
Nilsen P, Bernhardsson S. Context matters in implementation science: a scoping review of determinant frameworks that describe contextual determinants for implementation outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):189.
Méadel C. Les controverses comme apprentissage [in French]. Hermès, La Revue. 2015;73(3):45–50.
Akrich M, Callon M, Latour B. Sociologie de la traduction: Textes fondateurs [in French]: Presses des Mines; 2006.
Vezinat N. Les groupes professionnels au regard du couple intégration/exclusion [in French]. Sociologie des groupes professionnels. Paris Armand Colin; 2016. p. 15–27.
Weber M. Economie et société/2 : L’organisation et les puissances de la société dans leur rapport avec l’économie [in French]. Paris Plon; 1995. p. 425.
Champty F. La sociologie des professions [in French]: Presses Universitaires de France; 2012. p. 235.
Hénaut L, Marchal E, Castel P. Faire la concurrence: retour sur un phénomène social et économique [in French]: Presses des Mines via OpenEdition; 2017.
Bucher R, Strauss A. Professions in process. Am J Sociol. 1961;66:325–34.
Roland M, Mormont M. 1945–1990: maisons médicales, semailles et germination [in French]. Politique : revue belge d’analyse et de débat 2017;101.
Martinot-Lagarde P. De nouvelles formes d’engagement [in French]. Revue Project. 2008;305(4):48–54.
Jacques I, Spyros F, Pascal V. Militer aujourd’hui [in French]. Autrement ed. Paris. 2005. p. 139.
Ivaldi S, Scaratti G, Nuti G. The practice of evaluation as an evaluation of practices. Evaluation. 2015;21(4):497–512.
Timmermans S, Epstein S. A world of standards but not a standard world: toward a sociology of standards and standardization. Ann Rev Sociol. 2010;36:69–89.
Berquin A. Les soins de santé entre standardisation et personnalisation. Perspectives clinique, économique, éthique et anthropologique [in French]: Seli Arslan; 2009.
Champy F. La sociologie des professions [in French]: Presses universitaires de France 2018.
Cooke B, Kothari U. Participation: The new tyranny?: Zed books; 2001.
Plamondon K, Ndumbe-Eyoh S, Shahram S. 2.2 Equity, power, and transformative research coproduction. In Research Co‐Production in Healthcare. 2022. p. 34–53.
Turnhout E, Metze T, Wyborn C, Klenk N, Louder E. The politics of co-production: participation, power, and transformation. Curr Opin Environ Sustainabil. 2020;42:15–21.
Darcis C, Schoenaers F, Thunus S. The Belgian mental health reform: when a combination of soft instruments hampers structural change. Governance. 2022;35(2):437–56.
Download references
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the respondents who took the time to participate in this qualitative study. They also thank colleagues from the Institute of Health and Society for their helpful comments on previous versions of this article. We thank Mrs. Laura Jones, Mrs. Elaine Purnell and Mrs. Beatrice Scholtes for having proofread the manuscript for English.
This research did not receive external funding.
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Institute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université catholique de Louvain, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs, 30, 1200, Brussels, Belgium
Madeleine Capiau, Jean Macq & Sophie Thunus
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Contributions
Conceptualization: MC, JM and ST; Formal analysis: MC; Investigation: MC; Methodology: MC, JM and ST; Supervision: JM and ST; Visualization: MC; Writing – original draft: MC; Writing – review and editing: MC, JM and ST. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Madeleine Capiau .
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate.
The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Louvain Catholic University Hospital (project number: 2020/25NOV/578).
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Cite this article.
Capiau, M., Macq, J. & Thunus, S. The co-production process of an assessment programme: Between clarifying identity and developing the quality of French-speaking Belgian community health centres. Health Res Policy Sys 22 , 28 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01112-y
Download citation
Received : 11 July 2023
Accepted : 24 January 2024
Published : 20 February 2024
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01112-y
Share this article
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
- Assessment programme
- Co-production process
- Primary care
- Multidisciplinary teams
- French-speaking Belgium
Health Research Policy and Systems
ISSN: 1478-4505
- Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
- General enquiries: [email protected]
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Table of contents. Step 1: Introduce your topic. Step 2: Describe the background. Step 3: Establish your research problem. Step 4: Specify your objective (s) Step 5: Map out your paper. Research paper introduction examples. Frequently asked questions about the research paper introduction.
Define your specific research problem and problem statement. Highlight the novelty and contributions of the study. Give an overview of the paper's structure. The research paper introduction can vary in size and structure depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or is a review paper.
Research Paper Introduction. Research paper introduction is the first section of a research paper that provides an overview of the study, its purpose, and the research question(s) or hypothesis(es) being investigated. It typically includes background information about the topic, a review of previous research in the field, and a statement of the research objectives.
Generally speaking, a good research paper introduction includes these parts: 1 Thesis statement. 2 Background context. 3 Niche (research gap) 4 Relevance (how the paper fills that gap) 5 Rationale and motivation. First, a thesis statement is a single sentence that summarizes the main topic of your paper.
Table of contents. Step 1: Hook your reader. Step 2: Give background information. Step 3: Present your thesis statement. Step 4: Map your essay's structure. Step 5: Check and revise. More examples of essay introductions. Other interesting articles. Frequently asked questions about the essay introduction.
The length of the will vary depending on the type of research paper you are writing. An introduction should announce your topic, provide context and a rationale for your work, before stating your research questions and hypothesis. Well-written introductions set the tone for the paper, catch the reader's interest, and communicate the hypothesis ...
1. The placeholder introduction. When you don't have much to say on a given topic, it is easy to create this kind of introduction. Essentially, this kind of weaker introduction contains several sentences that are vague and don't really say much. They exist just to take up the "introduction space" in your paper.
The introduction leads the reader from a general subject area to a particular topic of inquiry. It establishes the scope, context, and significance of the research being conducted by summarizing current understanding and background information about the topic, stating the purpose of the work in the form of the research problem supported by a hypothesis or a set of questions, explaining briefly ...
Steps to write a research paper introduction. By following the steps below, you can learn how to write an introduction for a research paper that helps readers "shake hands" with your topic. In each step, thinking about the answers to key questions can help you reach your readers. 1. Get your readers' attention
Introducing Your Topic. Provide a brief overview, which should give the reader a general understanding of the subject matter and its significance. Explain the importance of the topic and its relevance to the field. This will help the reader understand why your research is significant and why they should continue reading.
Overview of the structure. To help guide your reader, end your introduction with an outline of the structure of the thesis or dissertation to follow. Share a brief summary of each chapter, clearly showing how each contributes to your central aims. However, be careful to keep this overview concise: 1-2 sentences should be enough.
The introduction to an academic essay will generally present an analytical question or problem and then offer an answer to that question (the thesis). Your introduction is also your opportunity to explain to your readers what your essay is about and why they should be interested in reading it. You don't have to "hook" your readers with a ...
Start with a general overview of your topic. Narrow the overview until you address your paper's specific subject. Then, mention questions or concerns you had about the case. Note that you will address them in the publication. Prior research. Your introduction is the place to review other conclusions on your topic.
Dr. Michelle Harris, Dr. Janet Batzli,Biocore. This section provides guidelines on how to construct a solid introduction to a scientific paper including background information, study question, biological rationale, hypothesis, and general approach. If the Introduction is done well, there should be no question in the reader's mind why and on ...
After you've done some extra polishing, I suggest a simple test for the introductory section. As an experiment, chop off the first few paragraphs. Let the paper begin on, say, paragraph 2 or even page 2. If you don't lose much, or actually gain in clarity and pace, then you've got a problem. There are two solutions.
Every good introduction needs a thesis statement, a sentence that plainly and concisely explains the main topic. Thesis statements are often just a brief summary of your entire paper, including your argument or point of view for personal essays. For example, if your paper is about whether viewing violent cartoons impacts real-life violence ...
A captivating introduction should immediately grab the reader's attention and draw them in, enticing them to learn more about your unique research. It should be thought-provoking, relevant and informative. By connecting with your audience and allowing them to identify with your work, you create an emotional investment from the start.
The introduction to a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals: Present your topic and get the reader interested Provide background or ...
Medical Writing*. Orthopedic Procedures*. Ideally, the Introduction is an essential attention grabbing section of a research paper. If written correctly, the Introduction peaks the reader's interest as well as serves as a roadmap for the rest of the paper. An effective Introduction builds off related empirical research and demonstrates a ga ….
Generally, the introduction helps you to show your audience why your research topic is worth exploring. It gives you the chance to convince your reader why they should stick around and see what you have to say. The first 1-2 sentences of your introduction should give an elevator pitch of your work. Be clear, relevant, and to the point.
In a short paper—even a research paper—you don't need to provide an exhaustive summary as part of your conclusion. But you do need to make some kind of transition between your final body paragraph and your concluding paragraph. This may come in the form of a few sentences of summary. Or it may come in the form of a sentence that
Schedule a free 1-1 strategy session with me to see how I can help you achieve your research goals: https://academicenglishnow.com/schedule?utm_source=YouTub...
Writing a great introduction can be a great foundation for the rest of your psychology paper. To create a strong intro: Research your topic. Outline your paper. Introduce your topic. Summarize the previous research. Present your hypothesis or main argument.
Clearly, research impact entails more than the academic criterion of publishing papers in top-tier journals. Indeed, there are multiple ways in which research impact might be achieved and assessed (AACSB, 2012).For many researchers the most obvious way to create research impact is to share research findings through practice-oriented pieces written for professional or press outlets such as ...
Using a qualitative approach, our research drew on two sources of data: documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews. Data collection. First, we conducted documentary research on the co-production of the assessment programme. This first data collection aimed to obtain the story of the development of the assessment programme.