how to write the research environment

Research Environment

• Open Access
• First Online: 28 March 2023

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• Lana Barać   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0170-5972 3  

Part of the book series: Collaborative Bioethics ((CB,volume 1))

6503 Accesses

1 Citations

Successful research environment requires joint effort by individual researchers, research groups and the organization. This chapter describes the basic principles and good research practices in the context of the research environment and serves as a guide to good, responsible research for research newcomers – researchers at the beginning of their scientific career. In this chapter we will help you navigate the organizational pathway to doing good research. The first step to understanding your rights, obligations and responsibilities in research is knowing that they exist. This chapter offers an introductory level orientation to codes, rules and regulations but also serves as a guide on how to identify whether your organization goes above and beyond offering guidance and assistance regarding research integrity or whether it provides a bare minimum or even nothing at all, and who/what you can turn to in the latter case. Furthermore, this chapter also describes the responsibilities that you as a researcher have towards the organisation regarding the importance of maintaining research integrity, so that you are aware of your accountability and the possible consequences if you disregard organizational responsibility for responsible research.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Research Integrity: Responsible Conduct of Research

Research Integrity and Hidden Value Conflicts

Research Assessments Should Recognize Responsible Research Practices. Narrative Review of a Lively Debate and Promising Developments

• Research climate
• Research culture
• Research ethics structures
• Research integrity structures

What This Chapter Is About

Successful research environment requires joint effort by individual researchers, research groups and the organization. This chapter describes the basic principles and good research practices in the context of research environment and serves as a guide to good, responsible research for research newcomers – researchers at the beginning of their scientific career. In this chapter we will help you navigate the organizational pathway to doing good research. The first step to understanding your rights, obligations and responsibilities in research is knowing that they exist. This chapter offers an introductory level orientation to codes, rules and regulations but also serves as a guide on how to identify whether your organization goes above and beyond offering guidance and assistance regarding research integrity or whether it provides a bare minimum or even nothing at all, and who/what you can turn to in the latter case. Furthermore, this chapter also describes the responsibilities that you as a researcher have towards the organisation regarding the importance of maintaining research integrity, so that you are aware of your accountability and the possible consequences if you disregard organizational responsibility for responsible research.

Case Scenario: Research Environment and Research Integrity

This hypothetical scenario was adapted from a narrative concerning the links between research environments and research integrity. The case scenario was developed by the Members of The Embassy of Good Science and is available at the Embassy of Good Science . The case below is published under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, version 4.0 (CC BY-SA 4.0).

After 6 months of working as a novice researcher in a research lab at a university school, you meet up with a colleague who graduated with you and is now working as a novice researcher in a commercial research organization. She tells you that she may have encountered a potential research misconduct concerning intellectual property. She knew what she had to do because the company is very committed to making sure all employees are fully informed about all existing rules and regulations. Her action prevented the misconduct. That conversation made you think that you were never been briefed or informed in detail about rules and regulations regarding research when you signed your employment contract with your organization. You heard your mentor casually mention “standard rules of conduct in research,” expecting you to know what they are. The day after your meeting with your colleague, you check your school’s webpages for information on research integrity. Although there is no explicit mention of research integrity, your University’s website refers to its own code of conduct as well as the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Furthermore, a university-wide academic integrity complaints procedure and a research integrity committee are mentioned but details of which, however, cannot be found on the university’s public webpages. After talking to your fellow novice researchers, you realize that they too are uncertain about whether your school has written guidelines for research integrity. You also realize that they feel pressurized to generate more and more research outputs and that insecurity, linked to short-term contracts and scarce opportunities for professional advancement, means that they perceive the incentives to succeed in research and academia as outweighing the incentives to comply with the norms of good research practices. They not only feel that your school does not adequately promote research integrity but that that pressure comes within the organization, also as a result of the culture of “ publish or perish ” After talking to them you realise that there is more to this problem than just ignorance or integrity issues with individual novice researchers and that their views could indicate an environmental problem in academia.

Questions for You

In light of this case scenario, what do you think which person(s) or groups should be responsible for the early-career researchers’ general lack of knowledge concerning the university’s research integrity guidelines, codes of conduct and complaints procedures? What are the reasons for your answer?

In what ways could a research organization make its research integrity standards, guidelines and processes more visible to its researchers, especially early-career researchers? What initiatives should be promoted in a research organization in order to engage early-career researchers with research integrity standards, guidelines and processes?

Thinking about the ways in which your organization currently engages early-career researchers with research integrity standards, guidelines and processes, what could be done to improve such engagement at the level of your organization and the level of your department or laboratory?

The Responsibilities of the Organization: Above and Beyond, or the Bare Minimum?

Good research practice from the european code of conduct for research integrity:.

Research institutions and organisations promote awareness and ensure a prevailing culture of research integrity .

When starting at a new job in a new research organization you have to understand that an organization is a living organism – a system with organized structure that functions as an individual entity and is, as all organisms are, prone to constant change. One change that has been having a huge momentum in Europe in recent years is the initiative to encourage activities that show commitment of organizations to make research integrity (RI) and responsible research in general as a top priority. Empowering sound and verifiable research and fostering a research integrity culture, thus creating a proper research environment, is now empowered by embedding these principles as requirements in EU funding schemes. As research environment is a dimension that needs to be considered by all involved stakeholders, activities conducted in order to foster good research practices and a culture of research integrity will impact researchers at all levels.

When we talk about organization as a system, the terms organizational climate and organizational culture are sometimes used interchangeably or considered as complementary constructs. The two terms are different. Organizational climate is usually defined as shared perceptions of policies, practices and procedures experienced by the employees, as well as the behaviours the employees perceive as rewarding. It is considered to be the measurable manifestation of organizational culture , which is defined as the system of basic assumptions, deep values and beliefs that are prevalent in the organization. Organizational culture is something that has to be built, maintained and nurtured by supportive environment.

As a part of organizational culture, research integrity has become an integral part of a university’s mission, vision and strategy. For example; universities in France will, in the near future, in what seems to be the first national initiative of its kind, go as far as requiring Ph.D. recipients to take an integrity oath on the day they successfully defend their thesis. Research integrity is also dependent on human factors – collegiality, openness, reflection, shared responsibility and work satisfaction are vital elements of a successful working environment. As a novice researcher, you should try, from the very beginning of your career, to comply with the highest standards of ethics and integrity in the performance of your research.

How can you figure out the ethical landscape at the very start of your career? The first step to understanding your rights, obligations and responsibilities is knowing that they exist .

Rules, codes and regulations can be created by the organization itself but also by national or international bodies. They can have different names and vary in scope, but they are always a written set of instructions issued by an organization. Depending on the scope of action, codes can cover issues prescribed by legal regulations such as: human subject’s protection, animal care, intellectual property and confidentiality, legality and mechanisms to identify and procedure for reporting and dealing with research misconduct. Other than binding legal issues, codes can also cover fundamental principles of research which serve organisations in creating and preserving an environment for responsible research. Fundamental principles presented by the most widely recognized and accepted documents – European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (All European Academies 2017) and Fostering Integrity in Research (US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2017), might not be identical in the naming of the principles but the meaning of the principles in RI perspective is similar (Table 1.1 ).

Not all research or academic organizations are as big or as well developed to have the resources to promptly and adequately inform you about all rules and obligations regarding research. That does not mean you are not required to follow them or that your rights are not protected by them. Organizational guides and codes should be easily accessible on the organization’s webpages and/or intranet. You should be provided with adequate training, tailored to the research discipline and the type of organization, and briefed about standard rules of conduct in research. Bear in mind that the organizational support structure is usually proportional to the size and complexity of the organization. Apart from having binding documents about responsible research, your organization should have established channels to facilitate an open dialogue at and between all levels; from management and senior researchers to novice researchers and other members of staff. Ideally, your organization should, apart from the standard rules and regulations, develop and implement a research integrity promotion plan (RIPP). This is a document that describes, on a general level, how the organization promotes research integrity and which concrete methods are employed or are being developed to foster research integrity and to deal with allegations of breaches of research integrity. Procedures to increase transparency of research investigation procedure and safe and effective whistle-blowing channels and the protection of alleged perpetrators should also be implemented in line with the legal principle of the presumption of innocence – someone accused of research misconduct is considered innocent until proven guilty.

When navigating the research environment, it is always advisable to consider the human factor. Some organizations are very organized. Some are not. Even though an organization may be committed to following the prescribed rules, do not expect to be given a clear and user-friendly version of these rules upon arrival. Some organizations have rules and regulations because they had to comply with national or international regulations. Other organizations have them because the management is devoted to actively promoting responsible research. Some organizations are understaffed, so the lack of organizational documents may not necessarily reflect the moral of the organization. In brief, even if your organization does not have instructions for the new employees written on a (virtual) bulletin board, that does not mean that they do not exist, so no matter whether you were briefed or not these rules apply to you and you should be governed by those rules.

Here is some advice for you on how to navigate responsible research environment in your organization:

Always get familiar with existing laws, codes and regulations in the organization and country where you work. If you are a member of a professional organization or if you are professionally bound to the code of ethics of your profession, check whether the professional code is aligned with that of your organisation. Some organizations may provide a checklist with sources and links to different guidelines and rules of procedure for good research practice available online. Do not forget to get familiar with international principles and EU standards such as The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity , principles prescribed for different professions (e.g., The Declaration of Helsinki or Convention on Biological Diversity ) and national guidelines, but first and foremost to the documents and guidance provided by your organization.

Consider that different views of research ethics around the world reflect differences in culture and legal frameworks, which can lead to differences in regulations. For example, the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) has a very expansive definition of personal information that may warrant protection, whereas in the United States (US), there is a narrower (and often domain-specific) characterization of privacy-sensitive information. Even within the EU, there are differences among EU member countries – the examples are different laws on stem-cell research and human embryos. Differences in regulations unfortunately may lead to ethics dumping – the practice of researchers trained in cultures with rigorous ethical standards to go and conduct research in countries with laxer ethical rules and oversight, in order to circumvent the regulations, policies, or processes that exist in their home countries.

Keep in mind that codes and regulations change and can evolve. For example, The Nuremberg Code; which is a set of research ethics principles for human experimentation was created by the US vs. Brandt et al. court case, as a result of the Nuremberg trials at the end of the World War 2. The core elements of the Nuremberg Code are the requirements for voluntary and informed consent, a favourable risk/benefit analysis, and the right to withdraw from a study without consequences. That standard was confirmed in 1964, when the WMA’s Declaration of Helsinki was endorsed and again specified that experiments involving human beings needed the informed consent of participants. The Declaration of Helsinki has been updated overe the years, so make sure that you consult its latest version. Another example is the infamous Tuskegee syphilis study , funded by the US Public Health Service. The study was conducted between 1932 and 1972 at Tuskegee Institute in Alabama to evaluate the natural history of untreated syphilis in African American males. The study was conducted for 40 years without ethical review and denied participants the effective treatment for this curable disease. The study became a milestone in the history of US research regulations, as it was conducted without ethical re-evaluation in spite of both The Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki being accepted and established as a standard during the study. The aftermath of the public disclosure of the Tuskegee study led to the establishment of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioural Research and the National Research Act that requires the establishment of institutional review boards (IRBs) at institutions receiving federal support.

Codes and regulations can also change due to scientific advancements that lead to new fields of research (e.g., the emergence of experimental psychology) or new technologies (e.g., gene editing, artificial intelligence). The changes can also come in response to changes in cultural values and behavioural norms that evolve over time (e.g., perceptions of privacy and confidentiality).

Consider emerging ethics topics , even if they are not listed or mentioned in current codes of your organization, such as bystander risk (impacts of research on other people; e.g. genetic testing and genetic research, second-hand exposure to a contagious disease) big data and open science (concerns about the potential to compromise privacy), and citizen science (involving community participation in science, allowing the research population to become researchers).

Research institutions and organisations demonstrate leadership in providing clear policies and procedures on good research practice and the transparent and proper handling of violations.

Knowing, understanding and using existing codes and regulations for good research is important and useful, but there may be times when you are in doubt about how what is written in a code translates into real life. Therefore, it is important to learn how to interpret, assess, and apply different research rules and how to make decisions to act ethically and responsibly in different situations or at least know who to turn to when in doubt . To put it simply: pure existence of the codes does not make an ethical environment. Or, in words of Aristotle: “One swallow does not a summer make.”

If codes, rules and regulations are the foundation of research integrity culture, building strong pillars to rest upon, establishing research ethics structures is the next crucial step for organizations to ensure proper research environment.

Different organizations may have different supportive mechanisms to ensure that researchers adhere to research ethics and integrity requirements. Depending on the size and the type of the organization, key organizational bodies and staff dealing with research ethics and integrity might quite vary in name and scope of work. It is important to understand that, depending on type of research organisation, you may encounter organisational bodies (or individuals) with various scope of activities regarding research ethics and integrity. This may seem confusing at first, as the concepts of ethics and integrity may seem intertwined and actually, for the most part, they are. Research ethics (RE) is the term that encompassed fundamental moral principles and research integrity (RI) is the quality of having moral principles, defined as active adherence to the ethical principles and professional standards essential for the responsible practice of research. Both of them are a necessary part of responsible conduct of research.

Ideally, your organisation will have all necessary structures, processes, and dedicated and adequately trained staff to uphold best research practices and standards, and deal with procedures relevant to the various research areas and disciplines within the organisation. Listed below are some of the common research ethics and integrity bodies (names might vary). If there is only one of these at your organisation, the scope of their responsibilities is probably wider and you can still contact them regarding any doubt and insecurity you might have about responsible research.

Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board is probably the most common body at academic and research organizations, because it has the longest history. Research Ethics Committees were developed after the World War 2, particularly in response to The Nuremberg Trials, as bodies responsible for oversight of medical or human research studies. The role of an Ethics Committee is to scrutinise research proposals and ensure that the proposed research adequately addressed all relevant ethics issues. This means that they make sure that proposed research protocols protect rights, safety, dignity and well-being of participants, that research protocols involving animals follow the highest animal care standards and that they facilitate and promote ethical research that is of potential benefit to participants, science and society. In smaller organisations that do not necessarily have other bodies, the role of the Ethics Committee would also be to facilitate and promote research integrity and good research practices, to have mechanisms to identify and procedure for reporting and dealing with allegations of breaches of research integrity (research misconduct).

Board/Office/ Commission for Research Integrity is a body that promotes responsible research conduct, serves as a knowledge base for questions regarding research integrity and research misconduct, informs on policies and procedures in and outside of the organization, handles allegations of research misconduct and conducts investigations, advises on administrative action and also responds to allegations of retaliation against whistle-blowers. It is responsible for providing advice for researchers on how to adhere to responsible research practices, usually through guidelines, checklists and other documents in which good research practices are presented. The organisational structures of RI committees and their responsibilities regarding cases of research misconduct may vary depending on the organisational or national regulations. For example, the Office for Research Integrity in the US is a governmental body that has monitoring and oversight role to ensure that researchers and organisations which receive federal funding for health research comply with existing regulations; it offers support to further good practice research and promote integrity and high ethical standards, as well as to have robust and fair methods to address poor research practices and misconduct.

Another individual position you may encounter at your organisation is the Research Integrity Officer (RIO) , a professional with a complex role. An organisation’s RIO promotes responsible research, conducts research training, discourages research misconduct, and deals with allegations of or evidence of possible research misconduct. The details of an RIO’s job vary from country to country, but the position is mandatory in many. For example, in US organisations, a RIO serves as the liaison between the federal Office for Research Integrity and the organisation of the researchers. In the EU, countries have different requirements and roles for their RIOs, but their task is essentially the same. Some countries do not have such bodies, and their role is most often taken by Ethics Committees.

Your organisation may have a Research Integrity Ombudsperson or Confidential Advisor on Scientific Integrity or Research Integrity Advisor . The aim of such an advisor is to promote fair, non-discriminatory and equitable treatment related to research integrity within the organisation and improve the overall quality of the research working environment. Such a position should be well known in the organisation, and there should be a low threshold for contacting this person. Researchers who experience research integrity dilemmas or have come into an integrity-related conflict should be able to discuss their case with the ombudsperson in a strictly confidential manner. The function of the ombudsperson should be clearly separated from a formal research integrity committee or ethics committee, so that it is clear to researchers that contacting the ombudsperson does not imply a formal registration of an allegation but a confidential and informal assistance in resolving research work-related conflicts, disputes and grievances (including, but not limited to complaints/appeals of researchers regarding conflicts between supervisor(s) and early-stage researchers).

Research institutions and organisations support proper infrastructure for the management and protection of data and research materials in all their forms (encompassing qualitative and quantitative data, protocols, processes, other research artefacts and associated metadata) that are necessary for reproducibility, traceability and accountability.

Even as an early-career researcher you probably realise that, while doing research, dealing with a fair amount of different types of data is inevitable. Ten years ago the Science journal polled their peer reviewers from the previous year on the availability and use of research data, and, about half of those polled stored their data only in their laboratories. If you had walked in any type of research organisation 10 years ago you would have had probably been briefed about keeping your lab notebook records and advised about keeping your data somewhere other than your lab desktop computer. Today, when we talk about data management, we go well beyond keeping your lab or research notebook in order. While maintaining a lab notebook is still essential for anybody performing research as a document of completed work so that research can be replicated and validated; or a legal document to prove intellectual property/invention, data management on an organisational level entails much more . It comprises the infrastructure (technology, services and staff support), training for researchers, and policies on data management (DMPs). Therefore, you should expect from your organisation to provide instructions and policies regarding data curation (repositories), management, use, access, publishing, and sharing. Regarding the technology for data management, your organisation should provide appropriate storage media that enables collecting, organizing, protecting, storing, and sharing data. It should also inform you about available data repositories, networks and different authentication systems. Research organisations should make DMPs easily accessible and organisations’ websites should provide extensive information about the concept of data sharing in general, as well as detailed information on DMP requirements and how to comply with them. Services and staff support for data management are highly dependent on the amount of funding and size of an organisation because the amount of work and time involved in these processes is extensive and costly. Some organisations have whole departments and others at best a single person for data management.

In 2019, Science Europe released its Practical Guide to the International Alignment of Research Data Management , and, as a follow-up, compiled the document to showcase some best practices. The document also demonstrated the variability of data management processes in different organisations. Although the readiness to develop DMPs can differ according to discipline, most research funders require researchers to include a DMP in their project proposals. You should expect from your organisation to have in place the structures and procedures to facilitate data management and curation procedures that are aligned with FAIR principles, which say that data should be F indable, A ccessible, I nteroperable, and R eusable. Bear in mind that researchers’ knowledge about research data management could be limited in countries and organisations where open science policies are not well developed. This leads to misunderstandings about the need to store and archive data. For detailed guidance on data practices and management throughout the lifecycle of research data and instructions to preparation of data management plans (DMPs) see Chap. 5 .

Research institutions and organisations reward open and reproducible practices in hiring and promotion of researchers.

No matter whether you have been in research for some time or you are a novice researcher, you have probably heard the catchphrase “ publish or perish !” because it has been uttered in whisper by stressed and burned-out researchers all over the world for years, putting pressures on individual integrity and potentially fostering practices harmful to scientific research. Publish or perish culture thrives on metrics (number of articles published and impact factors of journals) but fails to adequately take societal and broader impact into account . Some aspects of research are indeed quantifiable and cannot be and will not be ignored, but recent efforts towards more inclusive evaluation scheme of research and researchers could be a “game-changer”, meaning that yes, you are still required to publish, but the scientific efforts that translate better to a broader community will not be ignored.

When it comes to hiring and promotion in research, the need for transparency should be self-explanatory, but what does promoting open practices mean in reality? Geographically speaking, Europe might be ahead of the curve in endorsing and implementing changes as the new framework programme Horizon Europe makes Open Science mandatory throughout the programme and includes Open Innovation as one of three framework pillars. What does this mean for you? Although the attitude and the level of commitment of the organisation toward endorsing open science principles could vary and very much depend on the human factor, there is no reason for you not to be aware of the change to come and strive to fulfil the general idea of quality . Producing quality science would imply producing substantive, impactful science , science that reaches broader audience and addresses valuable questions, but is also reliable enough to build upon. This mean that evaluation and appraisal procedures may assess a researcher’s contribution to addressing societal needs and publishing all research completely and transparently, regardless of whether the results were positive or negative. This would also imply implementing open research practices and embedding these skills in training of early-career researchers, making preliminary results and final results available to the general public, potential users and the research community, in order to facilitate broader assessment and accountability of research.

There are also indications that the EU is moving towards a structured CV which would include Responsible Indicators for Assessing Scientists (RIAS), and other related information. For example; the department of psychology at LMU München added a paragraph to a professorship job advertisement which asks for an open science statement from the candidates: “Our department embraces the values of open science and strives for replicable and reproducible research. For this goal we support transparent research with open data, open material, and pre-registrations. Candidates are asked to describe in what way they already pursued and plan to pursue these goals.” Another example is University of Liège , where depositing papers in the repository is now the sole mechanism for submitting them to be considered when researchers underwent performance review.

Check whether your organisation has procedures related to the publication and communication of research results, such as preregistration, preprints, and online repositories, the organisational approach to open access, FAIR data curation, expectations about the use of reporting guidelines, procedures for avoiding predatory journals, strategies for responsible peer review practices, and mechanisms to support and acknowledge public communication of research findings. Also, check whether your organisation is ahead of the curve in promoting Open Science (Fig. 1.1 ) check for procedures and practices through the organisation’s own website or other established platforms on organisational or national level, check whether your organisation has signed any declaration relevant to Open Science .

Core principles of Open Science. For details, see the FOSTER project

The Responsibilities of the Researcher

Ask not what your organisation can do for you – ask what you can do for your organisation.

While The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ECoC RI) provides general guidance for good research practices and serves as a framework for self-regulation, the document that details your role, responsibilities and entitlements as a researcher is The European Charter for Researchers . The Charter is a set of general principles and requirements that addresses all researchers in the European Union at all stages of their career, covers all fields of research and takes into account the multiple roles that researchers can have.

Being a researcher is highly related to context and not defined only by job positions, formal qualifications level of education or by seniority at work. According to The Frascati definition ; Researchers are professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge . They conduct research and improve or develop concepts, theories, models, techniques instrumentation, software or operational methods. The tasks performed depend on job characteristics and personal strengths but have to be related to research and innovation. Activities of a researcher are many, but first and foremost entail: conducting and evaluating research and innovation, applying for research funding, managing projects and teams, managing, sharing and transferring the generated knowledge (including through scholarly communication, science communication to society, knowledge management for policy, and knowledge transfer to industry) and higher education teaching.

As an early-career researcher, you should keep in mind that everything you do reflects upon your organisation . So be sure to comply with the highest values and ethical standards and aim at excellence. Even as a novice researcher, at a beginning of your career be aware that your organisation will treat you as a responsible adult and will hold you accountable . Also, depending on the applicable rules, your organisation might be held accountable for your wrongdoing, so, even if you are there for a brief amount of time (post-doctoral or project-based position) remember that you are a part of the research environment and are expected to contribute to a positive, fair and stimulating research culture.

Science is by definition a joint endeavour and you should learn to accept responsibility because that is what being accountable entails. Accountability refers to an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility for one’s actions, meaning that, when individuals are accountable, they understand and accept the consequences of their actions for the areas in which they assume responsibility. Remember that you, as an employee, have contractual and legal obligations. That basically means that you are liable in case of breach of contract and you have to adhere to such regulations by delivering the required results (e.g. thesis, publications, patents, reports, new products development, etc), as set out in the terms and conditions of the contract or equivalent document. You should be familiar with the strategic goals, seek all necessary approvals before starting your research or accessing the resources provided. You should, at all times, keep a professional attitude . This included maintaining a professional etiquette at workplace – respectful and courteous demeanour towards colleagues and respect in the sense of responsibilities (e.g. informing your supervisor if you are not able to meet deadlines).

As a researcher, you should, first and foremost, focus your research for the good of mankind and for expanding the frontiers of scientific knowledge. You should be guaranteed the freedom of thought and expression , and the freedom to identify methods by which problems are solved, according to recognized ethical principles and practices. But, bear in mind that there is a difference between using research freedom and abusing it. You should, by all means, recognize the limitations to this freedom that could arise as a result of particular research circumstances or operational constraints (e.g. for budgetary or infrastructural reasons or, especially in the industrial sector, for reasons of intellectual property protection). Such limitations should not contravene recognized ethical principles and practices in research. When it comes to ethical principles , you should adhere to the recognized ethical practices and fundamental ethical principles appropriate to your discipline, as well as to ethical standards defined in different national, sectoral or organisational codes of ethics. It is highly recommended to conduct ethics self-assessment at the very beginning of planning your research. Ethics self-assessment helps getting your research protocol ethics-ready , as it may give rise to binding obligations that may later on be checked through ethics checks and reviews. Consider that ethics issues arise in many areas of research and, as of recently, major scientific journals require researchers to provide ethics committee approval before publishing research articles. You should also adopt safe working practices, in line with national legislation, including taking the necessary precautions by preparing proper back-up strategies.

As we mentioned before, Open Science practices should be the norm, especially when performing publicly funded research, as they improve the quality, efficiency, responsiveness of research and trust in science. You should guarantee open access to research publications and research data and foster innovation in sharing research knowledge as early as possible in the research process, through adequate infrastructures and tools. You should ensure, in compliance with your contractual arrangements, that the results of your research are disseminated and exploited. Be public and open about your research . There are, of course, legitimate reasons to restrict access to certain data sets (for instance in order to protect the privacy of research subjects) so be guided by the principle “ As open as possible, as closed as necessary” . Ensure that your research activities are made known to society at large in such a way that they can be understood by non-specialists, thereby improving public understanding of science. Direct engagement with the public will help researchers better understand public interest in priorities for science and technology and also their concerns.

You should seek to continually improve yourself by regularly updating and expanding your skills and competencies. This may be achieved by a variety of means including, but not restricted to, formal training, workshops, conferences and e-learning.

Do not be afraid to diversify your research career , as research community is diverse in talents and expertise and can produce a wide range of research outputs (from scholar publications to scientific advice for policy makers, science communication to the public, higher education teaching, knowledge transfer to industry, and many others). Explore different career paths within the research profession, so that your talent finds the best place to produce richer research results.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lana Barać .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Medicine, University of Split, Split, Croatia

Ana Marusic

If You Want to Learn More

The embassy of good science.

Case scenario – Research Environments and Research Integrity

Guidelines – Creating a map of the normative framework informing and governing the state of Good Science

Education – Literature and tools in research integrity and ethics

Published Articles

Ashkanasy N, Wilderom C, Peterson M (2011) The handbook of organizational culture and climate. Sage Publications, New York

Fischer BA (2006) A summary of important documents in the field of research ethics. Schizophr Bull 32(1):69–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbj005

Moher D, Naudet F, Cristea IA, Miedema F, Ioannidis JPA, Goodman SN (2018) Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure. PLoS Biol 16(3):e2004089. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089

Qiao H (2018) A brief introduction to institutional review boards in the United States. Pediatr Investig 2(1):46–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/ped4.12023

Qin J (2013) Infrastructure, standards, and policies for research data management. In: Sharing of scientific and technical resources in the era of big data: the proceedings of COINFO 2013. Science Press, Beijing, pp 214–219

Schneider B, Ehrhart MG, Macey WH (2013) Organizational climate and culture. Ann Rev Psychol 64(1):361–388. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143809

Ščepanović R, Labib K, Buljan I, Tijdink J, Marušić A (2021) Practices for research integrity promotion in research performing organisations and research funding organisations: a scoping review. Sci Eng Ethics 27(1):4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00281-1

Science Staff (2011) Special collection. Dealing with data. Challenges and opportunities. Science 331:692–693. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.331.6018.692

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). (2017). Fostering integrity in research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. http://nap.nationalacademies.org/21896

Zohar DM, Hofmann DA (2012) Organizational culture and climate. In: Kozlowski SWJ (ed) The Oxford handbook of organizational psychology, vol 1. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 643–666

The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity - framework for self-regulation across all scientific and scholarly disciplines and for all research settings. ECoC is a reference document for research integrity for all EU-funded research projects and as a model for organisations and researchers across Europe. All European Academies (ALLEA). (2017). https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/

The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement – Working with research integrity; guidance for research performing organisations

SOPs4RI Toolbox – Standard Operating Procedures and Guidelines that Research Performing and Funding Organisations can use to develop their own Research Integrity Promotion Plans

LERU – The League of European Research Universities (LERU) is a prominent advocate for the promotion of basic research at European research universities comprising of League of European Research Universities 23 leading universities pushing the frontiers of innovative research

Science Europe – Implementing Research Data Management Policies Across Europe: Experiences from Science Europe Member Organisations

Ask Open Science – Hosted by Bielefeld University, discussion (Q & A) on Open Science

The LSE Impact Blog – Six principles for assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure

The European Charter for Researchers – The European Charter for Researchers is a set of general principles and requirements which specifies the roles, responsibilities and entitlements of researchers

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), 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 license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license 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.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Barać, L. (2023). Research Environment. In: Marusic, A. (eds) A Guide to Responsible Research. Collaborative Bioethics, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22412-6_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22412-6_1

Published : 28 March 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-22411-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-22412-6

eBook Packages : Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. more...

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

National Research Council (US) and Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Assessing Integrity in Research Environments. Integrity in Scientific Research: Creating an Environment That Promotes Responsible Conduct. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2002.

Integrity in Scientific Research: Creating an Environment That Promotes Responsible Conduct.

• Hardcopy Version at National Academies Press

3 The Research Environment and Its Impact on Integrity in Research

To provide a scientific basis for describing and defining the research environment and its impact on integrity in research, it is necessary to articulate a conceptual framework that delineates the various components of this environment and the relationships between these factors. In this chapter, the committee proposes such a framework based on an opensystems model, which is often used to describe social organizations and the interrelationships between and among the component parts. This model offers a general framework that can be used to guide the specification of factors both internal and external to the research organization that is relevant to understanding integrity in research.

After its review of the literature, the committee found that there is little empirical research to guide the development of hypotheses regarding the relationships between environmental factors and the responsible conduct of research. Thus, the committee drew on more general theoretical and research literature to inform its discussion. Relevant literature was found in the areas of organizational behavior and processes, ethical cultures and climates, moral development, adult learning and educational practices, and professional socialization. 1

• THE OPEN-SYSTEMS MODEL

The open-systems model depicts the various elements of a social organization; these elements include the external environment, the organizational divisions or departments, the individuals comprising those divisions, and the reciprocal influences between the various organizational elements and the external environment (Ashforth, 1985; Beer, 1980; Daft, 1992; Harrison, 1994; Katz and Kahn, 1978; Schneider and Reichers, 1983). The underlying assumptions of the open-systems model and its various elements are as follows (Harrison, 1994):

External conditions influence the inputs into an organization, affect the reception of outputs from an organization's activities, and directly affect an organization's internal operations.

All system elements and their subcomponent parts are interrelated and influence one another in a multidirectional fashion (rather than through simple linear relationships).

Any element or part of an organization can be viewed as a system in and of itself.

There is a feedback loop whereby the system outputs and outcomes are used as system inputs over time, with continual change occurring in the organization.

Organizational structure and processes are in part determined by the external environment and are influenced by the dynamics between and among organizational members.

An organization's success depends on its ability to adapt to its environment, to tie individual members to their roles and responsibilities within the organization, to conduct its processes, and to manage its operations over time.

• THE OPEN-SYSTEMS MODEL OF RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS

Figure 3-1 shows the application of the open-systems model to the research environment, which can include public and private institutions, such as research universities, medical schools, and independent research organizations. As noted above, any element or part of an organization can be viewed as a system in and of itself. For research organizations, then, this includes not only the institution itself, but also any of its departments, divisions, research groups, and so on. Figure 3-1 illustrates the research environment as a system that functions within an external environment, whereas Figure 3-2 depicts the specific factors within the external environment and their influence on the research organization. These factors within the external environment are discussed later in this section.

Open-systems model of the research organization. This model depicts the internal environmental elements of a research organization (white oval), showing the relationships among the inputs that provide resources for organizational functions, the structures (more...)

Environmental influences on integrity in research that are external to research organizations. The external-task environment includes all of the organizations and conditions that are directly related to an organization's main operations and technologies. (more...)

An organization's internal environment consists of a number of key elements—specifically, the inputs that provide resources for organizational functions, the organizational structure and processes that define an organization's setup and operations, and the outputs and outcomes that are the results of an organization's activities. The system is dynamic, and, as indicated by the feedback arrow in Figure 3-1 , outputs and outcomes affect future inputs and resources. However, all of these components exist within the context of an organization's culture and specific climate dimensions—that is, the prevailing norms and values that inform individuals within the organization about acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. With respect to the committee's focus on integrity in research, the ethical dimension of the organizational culture and climate is very important.

Structurally, organizations are compartmentalized into various subunits, including work groups or divisions (the research group or team), along with other defined sets of organizational activities and responsibilities (e.g., programs that educate members about the responsible conduct of research, institutional review boards [IRBs], and mechanisms for disclosing and managing conflicts of interest). The operation of these programs and their overall effectiveness influence researchers' perceptions of the organization's ethical climate. Individuals within an organization exist both within and across these defined groups and sets of activities. Given this, it is important to differentiate between an organizational level of analysis (e.g., the research university, medical school, and independent research organization) vis-à-vis the group level of analysis (e.g., the research group or team) and the individual level of analysis (e.g., the individual scientist or researcher).

Inputs and Resources

In its examination of research environments, the committee focused on two input and resource factors of importance: the levels and sources of funding for scientific research, and the characteristics of human resources. These inputs and resources are obtained from an organization's external environment and are used in the production of an organization's outputs.

The research funding that an organization receives is distributed to research groups or teams and to individual scientists. Funding levels may increase and decrease over the years, both for the organization as a whole and for individual research groups. Just as the overall level of funding available for research within society affects the scientific enterprise as a whole, the level of funding coming into a particular research organization or research team also affects behavior.

The impacts that the level of funding and the competition over funding have on the responsible conduct of research are not clearly understood. There is some limited evidence that in highly competitive environments, individuals with a high “competitive achievement striving” are at risk for engaging in misconduct, particularly when they are faced with situations in which their expectations for success cannot be reached by exerting additional effort (Heitman, 2000; Perry et al., 1990). Encouraging a high level of individual integrity in research, despite vigorous competition for funding, presents a significant challenge for research organizations.

Human Resources

The human resources available to a research organization are also important to the analysis of integrity in research. The background characteristics of scientists coming into a research organization influence its structure and processes as well as its overall culture and climate, and these factors, in turn, influence the responsible conduct of research by individual scientists. Scientists (whether they are trainees, junior researchers, or senior researchers) entering into a research organization will have competing professional demands (e.g., research, teaching, practice, and professional service), and thus there are likely to be conflicting commitments. The dynamics of these competing demands and conflicting commitments change as individual scientists become integrated into the research organization, taking on specific roles and responsibilities.

Also, scientists enter into an organization with various educational and cultural backgrounds. They have different conceptions of the collaborative and competitive roles of the scientist, different abilities to interpret the moral dimensions of problems, and different capacities to reason about and effectively resolve ethical problems. These individual differences will influence organizational behavior, in general, and research conduct, in particular, in complex and dynamic ways.

Given this variation in human resource input into the research organization, it is particularly important for institutions to socialize newcomers and provide them with an understanding of the organization and how to act within it. As in any organization, newcomers must learn the logistics of their organization, the general expectations of their roles by peers, the formal and informal norms governing behavior, the status and power structures, the reward and communication systems, various organizational policies, and so on (Katz, 1980). Within research organizations, individual differences are complicated by the international nature of the scientific workforce and the corresponding sociocultural differences. Therefore, it is particularly important for research institutions to create an environment in which scientists are able to gain an awareness of the responsible conduct of research as it is defined within the culture, to understand the importance of professional norms, to acquire the capacity to resolve ethical dilemmas, and to recognize and be able to address conflicting standards of research conduct.

Organizational Structure and Processes

To better understand the impact of the research environment on integrity in research, it is important to focus on the organizational elements that characterize its structure—those elements that are more enduring and less prone to change on a day-to-day basis. These elements include an organization's policies and procedures; the roles and responsibilities of members of the organization; decision-making practices; mission, goals and objectives, including the strategies and plans of the organization; and technology.

Policies, Procedures, and Codes The formalization of policies and practices to support the responsible conduct of research is important in the analysis of research environments and their influence on integrity in research. Chapter 2 identified a number of the practices that are essential to the research environment. Specifically, a research organization should have explicit (versus implicit or nonexistent) procedures and systems in place to fairly (1) monitor and evaluate research performance, (2) distribute the resources needed for research, and (3) reward achievement. These policies and procedures should include criteria related to the responsible conduct of research that are applied consistently. Furthermore, research organizations support integrity in research when they have efficient and effective systems in place to review research involving humans and animals, manage conflicts of interest, respond to misconduct, and socialize trainees and other scientists into responsible research practices. The specification of these policies and procedures helps to regulate and maintain group control and reduce uncertainty about acceptable and unacceptable behaviors (Hamner and Organ, 1978).

Research has shown that strongly implemented and embedded ethical codes of conduct within organizations are associated with ethical behavior in the workplace. McCabe and Pavela (1998) describe the University of Maryland at College Park as one example where implementation of a strong “modified” 2 honor code has proven to be a successful strategy for creating a culture where cheating is viewed as socially unacceptable. Major elements of the Maryland model include (1) involving students in educating their peers and resolving academic dishonesty allegations, (2) treating academic integrity as a moral issue, and (3) promoting enhanced student-faculty contact and better teaching. The mere presence of an honor code, however, is generally not sufficient. Rather, the honor code is used as a vehicle to create a shared understanding and acceptance of the policies on academic integrity among both faculty and students (McCabe and Trevino, 1993).

Corporate codes have a similar effect in the workplace. An original study by McCabe demonstrated that self-reported unethical behavior was lower for survey respondents who worked in a company with a corporate code of conduct (McCabe et al., 1996). Self-reported unethical behavior was inversely correlated with the degree to which the codes were embedded in corporate philosophy and the strength with which the code was implemented (determined by survey questionnaire of employee perceptions).

Roles and Responsibilities The specification of roles and responsibilities within various research groups and teams and relevant research programs (e.g., education in the responsible conduct of research, IRBs, and conflict-of-interest review committees) provides a blueprint for researcher behavior. It is particularly important to clearly define researchers' responsibilities related to the responsible conduct of research. Furthermore, the relative positions of these responsibilities within the organizational hierarchy and the status of persons who operate them will send a clear message to the research community about the importance of such endeavors. For example, if a highly respected scientist with high status spearheads the program of education in the responsible conduct of research, and sufficient resources (in terms of both staff and financial resources) are available to carry out the program's work, then there is a greater likelihood that its efforts will be taken seriously. Again, these factors have great symbolic value within the organization and provide compelling images of the organization's ethical culture, which affects the degree to which members of the organization will internalize the norms associated with the responsible conduct of research (Pfeffer, 1981; Siehl and Martin, 1984).

Decision-Making Practices How an organization reaches decisions and formulates policies will affect individuals' perceptions of these policies and their behavioral compliance with them. Individuals are more likely to accept and adhere to policies and practices when they have played a role in their development and implementation. Hence, scientists are more likely to buy into various research policy decisions that are reached through a collaborative process among key stakeholder groups, rather than being imposed by a top-level centralized authority (Anderson et al., 1995, Saraph et al., 1989). Organizational research that focuses on the pursuit of quality and that explicitly values cooperation and collaboration to achieve maximum effectiveness leads to better decisions, higher quality, and higher morale within an organization (NIST, 1999). Classically, faculty and administrators both have governing roles in academic institutions, and this shared responsibility facilitates the bottom-up establishment of rules of research behavior.

Missions, Goals and Objectives, and Strategies and Plans The mission and goals of an organization specify its desired end states (e.g., becoming a “best-practice” site in terms of the protection of human research subjects). Objectives are the specific targets and indicators of goal attainment (e.g., becoming an accredited program and receiving recognitions and awards through scientific associations). Strategies and plans are the overall routes and specific courses of action (e.g., allocating the resources to comply with the standards for accreditation and ensuring that the program has leadership support) to the achievement of goals. If the responsible conduct of research is a prominent part of the mission and goals of a research organization, along with associated objectives, strategies, and plans, then the prominence of this issue sets the tone for the organization's ethical climate and sends a message to scientists that the responsible conduct of research is important. Research has shown that the most successful organizations are those that have a vision and goals that are clearly defined, consistent, and shared among their members (Anderson et al., 1995; Deming, 1986; Freuberg, 1986; Hackman and Wageman, 1995).

Technology An organization's technology offers the methods for transforming system resources into system outputs. It consists of such aspects of an organization's infrastructure as facilities, tools and equipment, and techniques. These aspects can be mental and social, mechanical, chemical, physical, or electronic. Research environments not only need the necessary tools and equipment for their respective types of scientific research, but they must also establish technologies (e.g., accounting systems and library and information retrieval systems) within the organization for the effective and efficient operation of the research. There may be competition within an organization to acquire the various forms of technology that are of sufficient quantity and quality to facilitate research production. The availability of this technology may, in turn, attract highly skilled scientists who hope to carry out research at the cutting edge of technology. As already mentioned, the effective management of competition—in this case, for technologies—is an important element of promoting the responsible conduct of research.

Organizational processes, as opposed to an organization's more stable and enduring structural elements, are the patterned forms of interaction between and among groups or individuals within an organization. Processes represent the dynamic aspects of an organization. The processes that characterize organizational dynamics are too numerous to mention here. However, in the committee's examination of research organizations, the processes of most interest consist of (1) leadership, (2) competition, (3) supervision, (4) communication, (5) socialization, and (6) organizational learning.

Leadership The level of support for high ethical standards by the leadership of an organization or research group can vary; leaders can be extremely supportive, can show ambivalence, or can be nonsupportive. Leaders at every level serve as role models for organizational members and set the tone for an organization's ethical climate (Ashforth, 1985; OGE, 2000; Treviño et al., 1996). Therefore, when leaders support high ethical standards, pay attention to responsible conduct of research, and are openly and strongly committed to integrity in research, they send a clear message about the importance of adhering to responsible research practices (Wimbush and Shepard, 1994). Considerable evidence from the organizational research literature supports the relationship between supervisor behavior and the ethical conduct of the members of an organization (Posner and Schmidt, 1982, 1984; Walker et al., 1979). Supervisors provide a model for how subordinates should act in an organization. Furthermore, supervisors have a primary influence over their subordinates, an influence that is greater than that of an ethics policy. Even if a company or profession has an ethics policy or code of conduct, subordinates follow the leads of their supervisors (Andrews, 1989).

Competition The extent to which the organization is highly competitive, along with the extent to which its rewards (e.g., funding, recognition, access to quality trainees, and power and influence over others) are based on extramural funding and short-term research production, may have negative impacts on integrity in research. Evidence from organizational research indicates that reward systems based on self-interest and commitment only to self rather than to coworkers and the organization are negatively associated with ethical conduct (Kurland, 1996; Treviño et al., 1996). In addition, the level of unethical behavior increases in organizations where there is a high degree of competitiveness among workers (Hegarty and Sims, 1978, 1979). Given these facts, one might expect that a research environment in which competition for resources is fierce and rewards accrue to those who produce the most over the short term sends a wrong message, a message that says “produce at all costs.”

Creating a reward system and policies that promote being the “best” within the scientific enterprise, and within a context that encourages the responsible conduct of research, represents a challenge in research environments.

Supervision The extent to which research behavior is monitored and quality control systems are operational will affect the level of adherence to ethical standards. Scientists need to see that policies about responsible research behavior are not just window dressing and that the organization has implemented practices that follow up stated policies. Consistency between words and deeds encourages the members of an organization to take policies seriously. Organizations vary widely in terms of their efforts to communicate codes of conduct to members, as well as to implement mechanisms to ensure compliance. When implementation is forceful and the policies and practices become deeply embedded in an organization's culture, there is a greater likelihood that they will be effective in preventing unethical behavior (McCabe and Treviño, 1993; Treviño, 1990; OGE, 2000).

Communication Communication among members of a research organization or research group that is frequent and open, versus infrequent and closed, should have a positive influence on integrity in research. A positive ethical climate is supported by open discussions about ethical issues (Jendrek, 1992; OGE, 2000). Frequent and open communication enhances awareness of issues, encourages individuals to seek advice when faced with ethical dilemmas, and establishes the importance of resolving issues before they become something to be hidden.

Socialization Mentoring relationships between research trainees and their advisers are important in the socialization of young scientists (Anderson et al., 2001; Swazey and Anderson, 1998). These relationships can be characterized by a variety of factors, including the level of trust, communication patterns, and the fulfillment of responsibilities as a mentor or trainee. In addition to mentoring relationships, education in research and professional ethics is an aspect of socialization (Anderson, 1996; Anderson and Louis, 1994; Anderson et al., 1994; Louis et al., 1995; Swazey et al., 1993). Socialization practices can be formal or informal, but they are essential to helping individuals internalize the norms and values associated with the responsible conduct of research. Research that examines the effect of more formalized methods of socialization—for example, education—reveals that interactive techniques (e.g., case discussion, roleplaying, and hands-on practice sessions) are generally more effective in producing behavioral change than are activities with minimal participant interaction or discussion (e.g., lectures or presentations [Davis et al., 1999]). Furthermore, sequenced education has a greater impact than single educational sessions (Davis et al., 1999; OGE, 2000). These findings substantiate the principles of adult education; these principles describe successful practices as being learner-centered, active rather than passive, relevant to the learner's needs, engaging, and reinforcing (Brookfield, 1986; Cross, 1981; Knowles, 1970) ( Chapter 5 ).

Organizational Learning Organizations that learn from their operations and that continuously seek to improve their performance are better able to adapt to a changing environment (Anderson et al., 1994; Deming, 1986; Hackman and Wageman, 1995; Schön, 1983). All organizations change over time, but for some this can be an excruciating and painful process if it comes about through reaction to a crisis situation. For example, when a research subject dies or a researcher is accused of data fabrication, the organization should respond immediately. However, this response is focused on crisis intervention rather than prevention. On the other hand, organizations that have mechanisms in place to continuously evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of their programs and activities are more likely to build a preventive maintenance system (Fiol and Lyles, 1985; Schön, 1983). Furthermore, if the members of an organization have a voice in the design and implementation of such systems, then they are more likely to accept and be cooperative with the continual evaluative processes.

Culture and Climate

All of the enduring elements and features of an organization's structure and its more dynamic processes exist within the context of an organization's culture and climate. In fact, an organization's structure and processes help to create the culture and climate inasmuch as they are shaped by them (Ashforth, 1985). An organization's culture consists of the set of shared norms, values, beliefs, and assumptions, along with the behavior and other artifacts (e.g., symbols, rituals, stories, and language) that express these orientations.. Culture and climate factors are characteristics of an organization that guide members' thoughts and actions (Schneider, 1975).

The ethical (or moral) climate is one component of an organization's culture and is particularly relevant in the analysis of integrity in research (Victor and Cullen, 1988). This climate is defined as the prevailing moral beliefs (i.e., the prescribed behaviors, beliefs, and attitudes within the community and the sanctions expressed) that provide the context for conduct. The stable, psychologically meaningful, and shared perceptions of the members of an organization are used as indicators of ethical climate, which may exist both at the organizational level and at the research group or team level (Schneider, 1975; Schneider and Reichers, 1983).

An ethical climate that supports the responsible conduct of research is created when scientists perceive that adherence to ethical standards takes precedence and that sanctions for ethical violation are consistently applied. Research in this area has established that the factors within an organization that are most strongly related to ethical behavior are attention to ethics by supervisors and organizational leadership, consistency between policies and practices, open discussions about ethics, and followup of reports of ethics concerns (OGE, 2000). These features of an organization can help establish an ethical climate in which organizational members perceive that the responsible conduct of research is central to the organization's practice and that it is not something to be worked around. It creates an environment in which a code of conduct is strongly implemented and deeply embedded in the community's culture (Treviño, 1990).

Outputs and Outcomes

The outputs of research organizations are produced at all levels—the organizational level, the research group or team level, and the individual scientist level. The outputs are the products produced, the services delivered, and the ideas developed and tested. The most obvious outputs are the number and quality of research projects completed, reports written, publications produced, patents filed, and students graduated.

For the committee's purposes, however, it is important to focus on the outputs of activities or programs related to integrity in research—for example, institutional review boards, conflict-of-interest review committees, and programs that provide education in the responsible conduct of research. Outputs from these programs are generally measured in terms of the quantity and the quality of activities—for example, the number of workshops and seminars offered, the number of scientists who participate, and the number of research proposals reviewed by IRBs and the dispositions of those proposals. Research organizations that design and implement high-quality activities related to integrity in research—and in a quantity that is sufficient to meet their needs—are more likely to achieve the outcomes that they seek (e.g., adherence to responsible research practices). Although these activities will not be the sole factors that determine the responsible conduct of research, their implementation becomes a symbol for the members of an organization, serving as an indicator of the leadership's commitment to the establishment of a culture and a climate that supports the responsible conduct of research.

The outcomes of organizational activities refer to the specific results that reflect the achievement of goals and objectives. As with organizational outputs, outcomes can be associated with the organization as a whole, the research group, or the individual scientist. However, the committee's primary interest is in the individual scientist's level of integrity in research. As discussed in Chapter 2 , the committee defines integrity in research as the individual scientist's adherence to a number of normative practices for the responsible conduct of research.

Adherence to these practices provides a set of behavioral indicators of an individual's integrity in research. However, behavioral compliance is assumed to be associated with an understanding of the norms, rules, and practices of science. In addition, judgments about an individual's integrity are based on the extent to which intellectual honesty, accuracy, fairness, and collegiality consistently characterize the dispositions and attitudes reflected in a researcher's practice. Judgments about a person's integrity are less about strict adherence to the rules of practice and are more about the disposition to be intellectually honest, accurate, and fair in the practice of science (i.e., in the willingness to admit and correct one's errors and shortcomings).

The committee resisted defining integrity in terms of (1) adherence to the normative practices listed in Chapter 2 , (2) the knowledge and awareness of the practices of responsible research, and (3) the attitudes and orientation toward the practices of responsible research (i.e., the degree to which individuals agree with the practices, the level of importance that they attach to them, and the extent to which they are subject to conflicting sets of practices), as has been common in the social sciences. 3 These three conceptually distinct categories of outcomes fail to capture the complexity of the process through which individuals interact with their environment and make ethical decisions. One simply cannot assume that as scientists gain awareness of standards of practice, they will be positively oriented to them or will be more likely to adhere to the behavioral requirements. The committee recognizes that although researchers might be well intentioned, there is truth in what psychologists (Rest, 1983) have observed: that everyone is capable of missing a moral issue (moral blindness); developing elaborate and internally persuasive arguments to justify questionable actions (defective reasoning); failing to prioritize a moral value over a personal one (lack of motivation or commitment); being ineffectual, devious, or careless (character or personality defects, often implied when someone is referred to as “a jerk”); or having ineffectual skills at problem solving or interpersonal communication (incompetence).

For this reason, focusing on the processes that give rise to the responsible conduct of research are important individual-level outcomes of organizational activities within the research environment. Components of the process of ethical decision making include ethical sensitivity, reasoning, moral motivation and commitment, and character and competence (Bebeau, 2001). Educational programs that train scientists in the responsible conduct of research are often premised on the assumption that these essential capacities for ethical decision making are well developed by the time individuals begin their research education, and that one simply needs to teach the rules of the responsible conduct of research. Research on ethical development in the professions demonstrates that even mature professionals show considerable variability on performance assessments that measure ethical sensitivity, moral reasoning and judgment, professional role orientation, and appropriate character and competence to implement action plans effectively.

Therefore, if a research environment implements educational programs to foster integrity in research, then these programs should promote sensitivity to issues that are likely to arise in the research setting by building a capacity for reasoning carefully about conflicts inherent in proposing, conducting, and reporting research; by developing a sense of personal identity that incorporates the norms and values of the research culture; and by building competence in problem solving and interpersonal communication (see Chapter 5 for further discussion).

External Environment

The external environment of a research organization consists of both an external-task environment and a general environment ( Figure 3-2 ). The external-task environment includes all the organizations and conditions that are directly related to an organization's main operations and its technologies. The systems and subsystems of the external-task environment are embedded within the larger sociocultural, political, and economic environment and have a more indirect impact on an organization. It is important to recognize that relationships also exist between and among all elements within the external environment. For example, government policies and regulations can affect the areas and levels of funding. Journal policies can be affected by decisions made within scientific associations, and these decisions can be driven by government regulation (or pending regulation).

External-Task Environment

A number of factors within the external-task environment have a significant impact on scientists' responsible conduct of research. These factors include government regulation, funding for scientific work, job opportunities for trainees and researchers, journal policies and practices, and the policies and practices of scientific societies.

Government Regulation Governmental bodies, particularly at the federal level, have been promulgating regulations concerning the conduct of research for many years. Most widely known and recognized are the regulations regarding the protection of human research subjects (45 C.F.R. § 46, 1999; 21 C.F.R. § 50 and 56, 1998) and the protection of animals in research (7 U.S.C. §§ 2131, 1966, et seq.). Furthermore, regulations have been promulgated regarding the evaluation of allegations and the reporting of scientific misconduct (42 C.F.R. § 50, §§A, 1989; Federal Register , 2000) and the handling and disposal of hazardous chemicals in the laboratory (29 C.F.R. § 1910.1450, 1996), to name just two. As these government regulations come into force, they have direct impacts on a research organization and individual scientists. Specifically, organizations and individuals must be in compliance with the regulations or face sanctions.

Funding for Scientific Work Research organizations are directly affected by both the level and the source of funding that is available for scientific work (e.g., they are affected by the balances between government and corporate support and between industry and foundation support). Most funding sources provide support for specific research proposals rather than particular investigators. Although proposals are usually ranked on a relative scale, more typically they are funded in an all-or-none fashion. At the same time, funding needs always outpace funding opportunities. For instance, only one in three investigator-initiated grant proposals (see http://silk.nih.gov/public/[email protected]. dsncc ) to the National Institutes of Health is successful. In this situation, even investigators who succeed in their research sometimes lose funding, a fate that threatens the very existence of their projects and often threatens their personal incomes.

The task for research organizations is to develop structures that help their scientists deal with this competitive research situation while maintaining the responsible conduct of research. Similarly, when corporate or industry funds are involved, research organizations should require strategies for the management and disclosure of conflicts of interest to reduce problems related to publication rights, ownership of intellectual property, and research involving human subjects.

Job Opportunities When the job market is tight and there is more competition for every research position, researchers will be pressured to achieve higher levels of productivity and recognition. This situation challenges scientists to be the best while maintaining the highest levels of integrity in research. Similarly, research programs must compete for students and postdoctoral fellows, who, in turn, enhance a program's accomplishments and overall status. The ability of researchers to gain recognition often is believed to be the best path to attracting high-quality trainees to a program. The organizational challenge is to help researchers develop competitive programs while maintaining a high level of commitment to integrity in research.

Journal Policies and Practices Journal editors can be more or less rigorous in their implementation of the review process and the extent to which they insist on high levels of adherence to scientific standards. Furthermore, journals may have specific policies in such areas as authorship practices, disclosure of conflicts of interest, duplicate publication, and reporting of research methodologies. The scientific community receives an important message about integrity in research when journal policies and practices regarding these practices are clear and are required as a condition of publication—and when the most prestigious journals adopt such practices. For example, members of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors recently revised their submission policies related to industry-sponsored research. Authors are now required to sign a statement accepting full responsibility for the conduct of a clinical trial, and they must confirm that they had access to the original data and had full control over the decision to publish (Davidoff et al., 2001).

Policies and Practices of Scientific Societies Scientific societies are in a position to influence the behaviors of their members in ways that could promote integrity in research 4 (AAAS, 2000). The societies vary extensively, however, in their development of codes of conduct, their enforcement of such codes, and their socialization of members with regard to these standards of behavior. To aid in this process, the Association of American Medical Colleges has published a guide to help societies in the development of ethical codes (AAMC, 1997). Other associations develop standards for accreditation—for example, standards for science education programs, research laboratories, and programs for the protection of human and animal research subjects. These accreditation standards generally have specific statements regarding the responsible conduct of research and stipulate the structures within the organization that must be in place to ensure compliance with the standards. Scientists who are part of such accredited programs will be subject to the influences of these external controls.

General Environment

The general environment has an indirect impact on an organization. This environment includes all of the conditions and institutions that have sustained or infrequent impacts on the organization and its functions (Harrison, 1994). Included are the state or conditions of major social institutions (e.g., the economy, political system, educational system, science and technology system, and legal system) as well as the local, national, and international cultures within which an organization operates. The general public, and more specifically the effects of public trust in the research enterprise, are also important components of the general environment. As reflected in Figure 3-2 , the organizations and conditions of the external-task environment (unshaded circles) are embedded within this larger environment (shaded area).

An example of how the broader environment can affect the conduct of research is the recent national debate over embryonic stem cell research; this debate reflects a clash of values that affect the characterization of ethical or unethical research (NAS, 2001; National Bioethics Advisory Commission, 1999). In another instance, the new rules governing the privacy of health records that are part of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act are being challenged by scientists as too restrictive in providing access to identifiable data for research (AAMC, 2001; Annas, 2002). Also, society places a high premium on human rights and the protection of vulnerable persons, values that have been translated into federal regulations for the protection of human research subjects (45 C.F.R. § 46, 1993, and 21 C.F.R. § 50 and 56, 1981).

Other social institutions also have an indirect impact on research environments. Educational systems produce scientists, and these systems affect not only their quantity but also their quality and how well they have been socialized into professional standards of conduct. The technology systems determine the availability of equipment and the methods used to carry out various types of research, factors that may raise questions about the propriety of certain research endeavors. Ethical conflicts are often created when the development of new technologies requires an answer to the question of whether what can be done should be done. Finally, the legal system and the propensity in the United States to resort to litigation may bring about situations in which scientists are caught between the responsible conduct of research and subpoenas for confidential data. These examples are by no means exhaustive, but they reflect the ways in which major social institutions and cultural values can affect research organizations and a scientist's practice of research.

The committee found no comprehensive body of research or writing that can guide the development of hypotheses regarding the relationships between the research environment and the responsible conduct of research. However, viewing the research environment as an open-systems model, which is often used in general organizational and administrative theory, makes it possible to hypothesize how various components affect integrity in research. Inputs of funds and other resources can influence behavior both positively and negatively. The organizational structure and processes that typify the mission and activities of an organization can either promote or detract from the responsible conduct of research. The culture and climate that are unique to an organization both promote and perpetuate certain behaviors. Finally, the external environment, over which individuals and, often, institutions have little control, can affect behavior and alter institutional integrity for better or for worse.

• AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 2000. The Role and Activities of Scientific Societies in Promoting Research Integrity . A report of a conference, April 10, 2000, Washington, DC. [Online]. Available: http://www.aaas.org/spp/dspp/sfrl/ projects/integrity.htm [Accessed January 7, 2002].
• AAMC (Association of American Medical Colleges). 1997. Developing a Code of Ethics in Research: A Guide for Scientific Societies . Washington, DC: AAMC.
• AAMC. 2001. Letter to Secretary Thompson on Impact of Medical Privacy Rule on Research . [Online]. Available: http://www.aamc.org/advocacy/corres/research/thompson. htm [Accessed February 1, 2002].
• Anderson J, Rungtusanatham M, Schroeder R, Devaraj S. 1995. A path analytic model of a theory of quality management underlying the Deming management method: Preliminary empirical findings. Decision Sciences26:637–658.
• Anderson MS. 1996. Misconduct and departmental context: Evidence from the Acadia Institute's Graduate Education Project. Journal of Information Ethics5(1):15–33.
• Anderson MS, Louis KS. 1994. The graduate student experience and subscription to the norms of science. Research in Higher Education35:273–299.
• Anderson MS, Louis KS, Earle J. 1994. Disciplinary and departmental effects on observations of faculty and graduate student misconduct. Journal of Higher Education65:331– 350.
• Anderson MS, Oju EC, Falkner TMR. 2001. Help from faculty: Findings from the Acadia Institute Graduate Education Study. Science and Engineering Ethics7:487–503. [ PubMed : 11697005 ]
• Andrews KR. 1989. Ethics in practice. Harvard Business Review Sept-Oct:99–104. [ PubMed : 10295476 ]
• Annas GJ. 2002. Medical privacy and medical research—judging the new federal regulations. New England Journal of Medicine346:216–220. [ PubMed : 11796863 ]
• Ashforth BE. 1985. Climate formation: Issues and extensions. Academy of Management Re view10:837–847.
• Bebeau MJ. 2001. Influencing the moral dimensions of professional practice: Implications for teaching and assessing for research integrity. In: Steneck NH, Scheetz MD, eds. [2000]. Investigating Research Integrity: Proceedings of the First ORI Research Conference on Research Integrity . Washington, DC: Office of Research Integrity, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Pp.179-188.
• Bebeau MJ, Rest JR, Narvaez D. 1999. Beyond the promise: A perspective on research in moral education. Educational Researcher28(4):18–26.
• Beer M. 1980. Organizational Change and Development—A Systems View . Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear.
• Brookfield SD. 1986. Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning: A Comprehensive Analysis of Principles and Effective Practices . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Cross KP. 1981. Adults as Learners: Increasing Participation and Facilitating Learning . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Daft R. 1992. Organizations: Theory and Design , 4th ed. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
• Davidoff F, DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Nicholls MG, Hoey J, Hojgaard L, Horton R, Kotzin S, Nylenna M, Overbeke AJPM, Sox HC, Van Der Weyden MB, Wilkes MS. 2001. Sponsorship, authorship and accountability. Canadian Medical Association Journal165:786–788. [ PMC free article : PMC81460 ] [ PubMed : 11584570 ]
• Davis D, O'Brien MAT, Freemantle N, Wolf FM, Mazmanian P, Taylor-Vaisey A. 1999. Impact of formal continuing medical education: Do conferences, workshops, rounds, and other traditional continuing education activities change physician behavior or health care outcomes?Journal of American Medical Association282:867–874. [ PubMed : 10478694 ]
• Deming WE. 1986. Out of Crisis . Cambridge, MA: Center for Advanced Engineering Study, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
• Donabedian A. 1980. Explorations in Quality Assessment and Monitoring: The Definition of Quality and Approaches to Its Assessment . Vol. 1. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press.
• Federal Register. 2000. Public Health Service Standards for the Protection of Research . [Online]. Available: http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID= 47426132664+0+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve [Accessed March 18, 2002].
• Fiol DC, Lyles MA. 1985. Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review10:803– 813.
• Freuberg D. 1986. The Corporate Conscience: Money, Power, and Responsible Business . New York, NY: American Management Association.
• Hackman JR, Wageman R. 1995. Total quality management: Empirical, conceptual, and practical issues. Administrative Science Quarterly40:309–342.
• Hamner WC, Organ DW. 1978. Organizational Behavior: An Applied Psychological Approach . Dallas, TX: Business Publications.
• Harrison MI. 1994. Diagnosing Organizations: Methods, Models, and Processes , 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Hegarty WH, Sims HP. 1978. Some determinants of unethical decision behavior: An experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology63:451–457.
• Hegarty WH, Sims HP. 1979. Organizational philosophy, policies, and objectives related to unethical decision behavior: A laboratory experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology64:331–338.
• Heitman E. 2000. Ethical values in the education of biomedical researchers. Hastings Center Report30:S40–S44. [ PubMed : 10971905 ]
• Jendrek MP. 1992. Students' reactions to academic dishonesty. Journal of College Student Development33:260–273.
• Katz D, Kahn R. 1978. The Social Psychology of Organizations , 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley.
• Katz R. 1980. Time and work: Toward an integrative perspective. In: Staw BM, Cummings LL, eds. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 2. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Pp. 81– 127.
• Knowles MS. 1970. The Modern Practice of Adult Education: Andragagy Versus Pedagogy . New York, NY: New York Association Press.
• Kohlberg L. 1984. The Psychology of Moral Development: The Nature and Validity of Moral Stages . San Francisco: Harper & Row. Essays on Moral Development Vol. 2.
• Kurland N. 1996. Trust, accountability, and sales agents' dueling loyalties. Business Ethics Quarterly6:289–310.
• Louis KS, Anderson MS, Rosenberg L. 1995. Academic misconduct and values: The department's influence. The Review of Higher Education18:393–422.
• McCabe DL. 2000. New research on academic integrity: the success of “modified” honor codes. Synfax Weekly Report [Online]. Available: http://www.collegepubs.com/ref/ SFX000515.shtml [Accessed July 25, 2001].
• McCabe DL, Pavela GM. 1998. The effect of institutional policies and procedures on academic integrity. In: Burnett DD, Rudolph L, Clifford KO, eds. Academic Integrity Mat ters . Washington, DC: National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, Inc. Pp.93–108.
• McCabe DL, Treviño LK. 1993. Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influences. Journal of Higher Education64:522–538.
• McCabe DL, Treviño LK, Butterfield KD. 1996. The influence of collegiate and corporate codes of conduct on ethics-related behavior in the workplace. Business Ethics Quarterly6:461–476.
• NAS (National Academy of Sciences). 2001. Biological and Biomedical Applications of Stem Cell Research . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• National Bioethics Advisory Commission. 1999. Ethical Issues in Human Stem Cell Research , Vol. I to III. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
• NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology). 1999. Malcolm Baldrige National Qual ity Award 1998 Education Criteria for Performance Excellence . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
• OGE (U.S. Office of Government Ethics). 2000. Executive Branch Employee Ethics: Survey 2000 . Washington, DC: OGE.
• Perry A, Kane K, Bernesser K, Spicker P. 1990. Type A behavior, competitive achievementstriving, and cheating among college students. Psychological Reports66:459–465. [ PubMed : 2349335 ]
• Peters TJ. 1978. Symbols, patterns, and settings: An optimistic case for getting things done. Organizational Dynamics7(2):3–23.
• Peters TJ, Waterman RH, Jr. 1982. In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America's Best-Run Companies . New York, NY: Harper & Row.
• Pfeffer J. 1981. Management as symbolic action: The creation and maintenance of organizational paradigms. In: Cummings LL, Staw BM eds. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 3. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Pp.1–52.
• Posner B, Schmidt W. 1982. What kind of people enter the public and private sectors? An undated comparison of perceptions, stereotypes, and values. Human Resource Manage ment21:35–43.
• Posner B, Schmidt W. 1984. Values and the American manager: An update. California Man agement Review26(3):202–216.
• Rest, J. 1983. Morality. In: Mussen PH (series ed.) and Flavell J, Markman E (vol. eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 3,Cognitive Development, 4th ed. New York, NY: Wiley. Pp.556–629.
• Rest J, Narvaez D, Bebeau MJ, Thoma SJ. 1999. Postconventional Moral Thinking: A Neo Kohlbergian Approach . Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
• Saraph JV, Benson PG, Schroeder RG. 1989. An instrument for measuring the critical factors of quality management. Decision Sciences20:810–829.
• Schein EH. 1968. Organizational socialization and the profession of management. Industrial Management Review9:1-15.
• Schneider B. 1975. Organizational climates: An essay. Personnel Psychology28:447–479.
• Schneider B, Reichers AE. 1983. On the etiology of climates. Personnel Psychology36:19–39.
• Schön DA. 1983. Organizational learning. In: Morgan G, ed. Beyond Method: Strategies for Social Research . Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Pp.114–128.
• Siehl C, Martin J. 1984. The role of symbolic management: How can managers effectively transmit organizational culture? In: Hunt JG, Hosking DM, Schriesheim CA, Stewart R, eds. Leaders and Managers: International Perspectives on Managerial Behavior and Leader ship . Elmsford, NY: Pergamon. Pp.227–239.
• Swazey JP, Anderson MS. 1998. Mentors, advisors, and role models in graduate and professional education. In: Rubin ER, ed. Mission Management: A New Synthesis, Vol. 2. Washington, DC: Association of Academic Health Centers. Pp.165–185.
• Swazey JP, Anderson MS, Louis KS. 1993. Ethical problems in academic research. American Scientist81:542–553.
• Treviño LK. 1990. A cultural perspective on changing and developing organizational ethics. Research in Organizational Change and Development4:195–230.
• Treviño LK, Butterfield KD, McCabe DL. 1996. The ethical context in organizations: Influences on employee attitudes and behaviors. Business Ethics Quarterly8(3):447–476.
• Van Maanen J, Schein EH. 1979. Toward a theory of organizational socialization. In: Staw BM, ed. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 1. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Pp. 209– 264.
• Victor B, Cullen JB. 1988. The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Administrative Science Quarterly33:101–125.
• Walker OC, Churchill GA, Ford NM. 1979. Where do we go from here? Selected conceptual and empirical issues concerning the motivation and performance of the industrial sales force. In: Albuam G, Churchill GA, eds. Critical Issues in Sales Management State of the Art and Future Research Needs . Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Press. Pp.10–75.
• Wanous JP. 1980. Organizational Entry: Recruitment, Selection, and Socialization of Newcomers . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
• Wimbush JC, Shepard JM. 1994. Toward an understanding of ethical climate: Its relationship to ethical behavior and supervisory influence. Journal of Business Ethics13:637– 647.

For general references on organizational behavior and processes, see Donabedian (1980), Hamner and Organ (1978), Harrison (1994), Katz (1980), Katz and Kahn (1978), Peters (1978), Peters and Waterman (1982), and Pfeffer (1981). For general references on ethical cultures and climate see Ashforth (1985), Schneider and Reichers (1983), and Victor and Cullen (1988). For general references on moral development, see Kohlberg (1984), Rest (1983), and Rest et al. (1999). For general references on adult learning and educational practices, see Brookfield (1986), Cross (1981), and Knowles (1970). For general references on professional socialization, see Schein (1968), Siehl and Martin (1984), Van Maanen and Schein (1979), and Wanous (1980).

Traditional honor codes generally include a pledge that students sign attesting to the integrity of their work, a strong, often exclusive role for students in the judicial process that addresses dishonesty allegations, and provisions such as unproctored exams. Some also require students to report any cheating observed. Modified honor codes generally include a strong or exclusive role for students in the academic judicial system, but do not usually require unproctored exams or that students sign a pledge. Modified codes do place a strong campus focus on the issue of academic integrity and students are reminded frequently that their institution places a high value on integrity (McCabe, 2000).

A recent review of approaches to the study of morality (Bebeau et al., 1999) has challenged the usefulness of the usual tripartite view that assumes that the elements to be studied and assessed are attitudes, knowledge, and behavior. When researchers have studied the connections among these elements, they usually do not find significant connections and are left with the conclusion that attitudes do not have much to do with knowing and behavior is often devoid of feeling and thinking. A more profitable approach is to assume that many types of cognitions, many types of affects, and many kinds of observable behaviors are involved in morality or integrity. All behavior is the result of cognitive-affective processes. Instead of studying cognitions, affects, and behaviors as separate elements, psychologists suggest that researchers study functional processes that must arise to produce moral behavior (Rest, 1983).

See Chapter 6 for further discussion of the role professional and scientific societies can play in fostering an environment that promotes integrity in research.

• Cite this Page National Research Council (US) and Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Assessing Integrity in Research Environments. Integrity in Scientific Research: Creating an Environment That Promotes Responsible Conduct. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2002. 3, The Research Environment and Its Impact on Integrity in Research.
• PDF version of this title (5.4M)

In this Page

Related information.

• PMC PubMed Central citations
• PubMed Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

• The Research Environment and Its Impact on Integrity in Research - Integrity in ... The Research Environment and Its Impact on Integrity in Research - Integrity in Scientific Research

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Research Environment

• In book: A Guide to Responsible Research (pp.1-17)
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• SCI ENG ETHICS

• Haiping Qiao
• David Moher

• ANNU REV PSYCHOL

• Science Staff
• SCHIZOPHRENIA BULL
• Bernard A Fischer
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

How to do Research on Environment

Besides the interaction of human activities that contribute to these ecological and environmental concerns, many other key factors or disciplines play a direct role in the study and research of environmental science topics, including biology, chemistry, engineering, geology, and physics, as well as economics, politics, psychology, and sociology. Thus, your research paper on environmental science subjects most likely will entail not only investigating your primary sources, described in this article, but also crossing over into other disciplines.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code, selected subject headings.

Listed below is a sample of a few broad Library of Congress subject headings—made up of one word or more representing concepts under which all library holdings are divided and subdivided by subject—which you can search under and use as subject terms when searching online library catalogs for preliminary and/or additional research, such as books, audio and video recordings, and other references, related to your research paper topic. When researching materials on your topic, subject heading searching may be more productive than searching using simple keywords. However, keyword searching when using the right search method (Boolean, etc.) and combination of words can be equally effective in finding materials more closely relevant to your topic.

Suggested Topics for Ecology and Environment Research

• Air Pollution
• Air Quality Management
• Conservation of Natural Resources
• Deforestation
• Environmental Health
• Environmental Law
• Environmental Law, International
• Environmental Protection
• Fishery Law and Legislation
• Hazardous Waste Sites
• Medical Wastes
• Refuse and Refuse Disposal
• Renewable Natural Resources
• Soil Pollution
• Sustainable Development
• Water Pollution

Selected Keyword Search Strategies and Guides

Most online library indexes and abstracts and full-text article databases offer basic and advanced “keyword” searching of virtually every subject. In this case, combine keyword terms that best define your thesis question or topic using the Boolean search method (employing “and” or “or”) to find research most suitable to your topic.

If your topic is “global warming and renewable natural resources,” for example, enter “global warming” and “renewable natural resources” with “and” on the same line to locate sources directly compatible with the primary focus of your research paper. To find research on more specific aspects of your topic, alternate one new keyword at a time with the primary keyword of your topic with “and” in between them (for example, “global warming and causes,” “global warming and health,” “global warming and pollution,” “global warming and solutions,” etc.).

For additional help with keyword searching, navigation or user guides for online indexes and databases by many leading providers—including Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, EBSCO, H.W. Wilson, OCLC, Ovid Technologies, ProQuest, and Thomson Gale—are posted with direct links on library Web sites to guides providing specific instruction to using whichever database you want to search. They provide additional guidance on how to customize and maximize your search, including advanced searching techniques and grouping of words and phrases using the Boolean search method—of your topic, of bibliographic records, and of full-text articles, and other documents related to your subject.

Selected Source and Subject Guides

Encyclopedia of Environmental Information Sources: A Subject Guide to about 34,000 Print and Other Sources of Information on All Aspects of the Environment , edited by Sarojini Balachandran, 1,813 pages (Detroit, Mich.: Gale Research, 1993)

Environmental Education: A Guide to Information Sources , by William B. Stapp and Mary Dawn Liston, 225 pages (Detroit, Mich.: Gale Research, 1975)

In addition to these sources of research, most college and university libraries offer online subject guides arranged by subject on the library’s Web page; others also list searchable course-related “LibGuides” by subject. Each guide lists more recommended published and Web sources—including books and references, journal, newspaper and magazines indexes, full-text article databases, Web sites, and even research tutorials—that you can access to expand your research on more specific issues and relevant to your subject.

Selected Books and References

Atlases and almanacs.

AAAS Atlas of Population and Environment , by Paul Harrison and Fred Pearce; foreword by Peter H. Raven, 216 pages (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001)

This atlas colorfully illustrates the relationship between the environment and the world population and is an excellent source of statistical data. Includes an index by topic.

Earth Almanac: An Annual Geophysical Review of the State of the Planet , 2nd ed., 576 pages (Phoenix, Ariz.: Oryx Press, 2001)

Arranged by subject area, entries offer a treasure trove of statistical environmental information. Appendixes provide additional worthwhile information, such as abbreviations, conversion formulas, Earth facts, a geologic time line, a glossary of terms, international and national scientific programs, and treaties and laws.

Environmental Engineering Dictionary , 4th ed., edited by C.C. Lee, 968 pages (Rockville, Md.: Government Institutes, 2005)

Seemingly every technical and regulatory engineering term used in environmental science—more than 14,000 in all—is defined and explained in this dictionary. Definitions conform to the Environmental Protection Agency’s requirements for statutes, regulations, and environmental science terms. Reference sources used for most definitions are also listed. An appendix features an extensive list of environmental acronyms.

Encyclopedias

Encyclopedia of Environmental Science , edited by David E. Alexander and Rhodes W. Fairbridge, 786 pages (Dordrecht, Netherlands, and Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999)

More than 1,000 entries, arranged in alphabetical order, highlight this encyclopedic volume covering key environmental terms and topics. Most entries include a list of references, including useful print and Web resources. Also provided is a series of useful appendixes, including a directory of environmental organizations, listings of endangered species by state, a timeline of environmental history, and Web sites by subject.

Encyclopedia of Global Change: Environmental Change and Human Society , edited by Andrew S. Goudie and David J. Cuff, 2 vols., 1,424 pages (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2003)

This authoritative guide features 320 essay-length articles, listed from A to Z, covering natural and artificial changes to the Earth’s biological, chemical, and physical systems. Highlighting the text are graphs, maps, and photos. Also included is a bibliography of sources.

Encyclopedia of Global Environmental Change , edited by Ted Munn, 5 vols. (New York: Wiley, 2002)

Five-volume set featuring 500 in-depth articles, 100 biographies, and 150 definitions. Articles are arranged by subject and contain abstracts, bibliographies, photos, and diagrams. Each volume includes an alphabetical list of articles in the back. This well-researched and well-written reference series is divided as follows: volume 1, The Earth System: Physical and Chemical Dimensions of Global Environmental Change; volume 2, The Earth System: Biological and Ecological Dimensions of Global Environmental Change; volume 3, Causes and Consequences of Global Environmental Change; volume 4, Responding to Global Environmental Change; and volume 5, Social and Economic Dimensions of Global Environmental Change.

Environmental Encyclopedia , 3rd ed., edited by Marci Bortman et al., 1,641 pages (Detroit, Mich.: Thomson-Gale, 2002)

Available in print and online via Gale Virtual Reference Library, this fully revised and updated edition includes many well-written, nontechnical articles offering critical analysis, current status, and possible solutions to the gamut of environmental issues facing the world today.

International Encyclopedia of Environmental Politics , edited by John Barry and E. Gene Frankland, 544 pages (London and New York: Routledge, 2001)

This A–Z encyclopedia covers environmental political issues around the world through more than 500 insightful entries that include a list of sources for further reading. Also provided is an index of entries arranged by major themes.

Macmillan Encyclopedia of Energy , edited by John Zumerchik, 3 vols. (New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2000)

Covers the broad spectrum of energy topics with more than 250 illustrated articles written by academic scholars and experts. Detailed biographies of key figures in the science and energy fields are also included. An electronic version of the entire contents of this three-volume set is available online via Gale Virtual Reference Library.

Macmillan Encyclopedia of the Environment , edited by Stephen R. Kellert, 6 vols. (New York: Macmillan Library Reference USA; London: Simon & Schuster and Prentice Hall International, 1997)

This full-color, beautifully illustrated six-volume reference series provides coverage of virtually everything about the environment, from basic information to recent developments. Detailed entries focus on such topics as biology, chemistry, climate and weather, ecology, endangered species, disasters, evolution, genetics, land use, natural resources, pollution, population growth, waste management, and more.

Pollution A to Z , edited by Richard Stapleton, 2 vols., 757 pages (New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2003)

Approximately 264 in-depth articles, written by leading scientists, educators, professionals, and other experts, covering all areas of pollution—air, land, space, and water—make up this important volume. Entries are wide ranging in scope, discussing current issues, key concepts, research, and legislation. Many topical issues are likewise critically examined, including asbestos and carbon monoxide and CFC pollution, among others. Also reviewed are social movements and organizations leading the fight against pollution, such as Earth First and the Green Party. This volume is also available by subscription online via Gale Virtual Reference Library.

The Wiley Encyclopedia of Energy and the Environment , edited by Attilio Bisio and Sharon Boots, 1,592 pages (New York: Wiley, 1997)

This acclaimed encyclopedia covers a wide range of energy and environmental topics, arranged alphabetically with lengthy entries illustrated by diagrams and photos. Bibliographies are listed at the end of each entry for further research in the respective subject area.

Global Environment Outlook , 4th ed., 576 pages (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007)

Region-by-region coverage of current environmental conditions around the globe is contained in this important reference source. Policy responses, future recommendations, and perspectives on many key environmental issues are discussed. Statistical data as it applies to the global environmental conditions are included, along with an index by topic.

The Wellbeing of Nations: A Country-by-Country Index of Quality of Life and the Environment , by Robert Prescott-Allen, in cooperation with International Development Research Centre et al., 342 pages (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2001)

Highlighting this 342-page volume is recent data on the quality of life and the environment in 180 countries worldwide. Indicators examined include air quality, energy use, global atmosphere, land health, protected areas, water quality, and resource pressures, among others, of each country. Included in the first section of the book are maps and charts and, in the second half, detailed data tables and methodologies used in the assessment of each country.

World Resources 2000–2001: People and Ecosystems, the Fraying Web of Life , 400 pages (Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute, 2001)

Published by the World Resources Institute, this printed edition, also available online, reviews global environmental trends as they relate to the world’s population, food and water supply, consumption and waste, energy use, climate changes, and well-being of humans. Entries are arranged by ecosystem and include key environmental and social indicators for more than 150 countries. An index offers easy access to specific topics.

Selected Full-Text Article Databases

Academic Search Elite  (Ipswich, Mass.: EBSCO Publishing, EBSCOHost, indexing/abstracting: 1984– , full text: 1990– )

Indexing a wide range of subjects, this premier academic database also includes general environment and environment-related journals, including Audubon, Ecology, Environmental Ethics, Environmental Science and Technology, Environment, Journal of Environmental Health, Oceanus, and Sierra.

Annual Reviews  (Palo Alto, Calif.: Annual Reviews, 1932– )

Current collection of critical reviews written by leading scientists, published yearly. Subjects explored include energy and the environment, ecology and systematics, genetics, and many more.

Biological and Agricultural Index Plus  (Bronx, N.Y.: H.W. Wilson Co., indexing: 1983– , full text: 1997– )

More than 225 peer-reviewed journals in agriculture and the life sciences are abstracted and indexed, including full-text articles, from such disciplines as ecology, environmental science, and forestry via WilsonWeb.

Environmental Issues on File CD-ROM  (New York: Facts On File, Inc.)

Offers current environmental facts, figures, and information in full text with maps, charts, numerical data, and detailed diagrams on a wide range of environmental and ecological issues and subjects, including atmospheric pollution, catastrophic weather events, environmental disasters, land and sea pollution, and more.

Expanded Academic ASAP  (Farmington Hills, Mich.: Thomson Gale InfoTrac, 1980– )

Like Academic Source Elite, this popular InfoTrac library database also indexes articles published in many leading general environment and environment-related journals, including some of the same titles, such as Audubon, Ecology, Environmental Ethics, Environmental Science and Technology, Environment, Journal of Environmental Health, Oceanus, and Sierra.

JSTOR  (Ann Arbor, Mich.: Journal Storage Project, 1996– )

Full-text journal collection that offers direct access to numerous ecology reference sources, including the Journal of Ecology, the Journal of Animal Ecology, and Ecology.

LexisNexis Environmental  (Dayton, Ohio: LexisNexis, 1970– )

Contains abstracts and full-text news from a large variety of sources, including scholarly and professional journals, conference papers and proceedings, federal and state government reports, major daily newspapers, consumer and trade magazines, newsletters, law reviews, administrative codes, case law, regulatory agency decisions, waste sites, and hazardous material data.

Wilson Select Plu s (Bronx, N.Y.: H.W. Wilson Co., 1994– )

Web accessible through OCLC FirstSearch, this searchable collection includes abstracts and full-text articles from more than 1,300 publications. Includes selected full-text articles from H.W. Wilson’s Business Abstracts, General Sciences Abstracts, Humanities Abstracts, Readers’ Guide, and Social Sciences Abstracts online databases.

Selected Periodicals

Audubon Magazine  (New York: National Audubon Society, 1899– , bimonthly)

Published by the National Audubon Society, one of the oldest and largest conservation societies in the United States, this bimonthly magazine covers a broad spectrum of conservation and environmental topics in each issue. The magazine is beautifully photographed and illustrated, and the primary focus of articles is on birds and wildlife and their habitats. Available electronically in full text from Expanded Academic ASAP (1997– ).

The Ecologist  (Wadebridge, U.K.: Ecosystems Ltd., 1970– , monthly)

Possibly the most widely read environment magazine, The Ecologist, read by some 200,000 subscribers in 150 countries, features authoritative articles on issues related to the environment. It examines such major environmental challenges as rain forest destruction, climatic changes, and environmental and political agendas around the world.

Ecology  (Washington, D.C.: Ecological Society of America, etc., 1920– , annually)

Published annually since 1920 by the Ecological Society of America, a Washington, D.C.–based nonpartisan, nonprofit organization of scientists, Ecology magazine pays particular attention to all aspects of ecology in its wide-ranging articles. Included are statistical reports, features, articles, notes, comments, and data papers covering new concepts, and analytical, experimental, historical, and theoretical approaches applicable to species, populations, communities, or ecosystems. Offered in print and electronic form, full-text articles from past issues are accessible through JSTOR from the first volume through 1998.

Electronic Green Journal  (Moscow, Idaho: Electronic Green Journal, 1994– , biannual)

Web-based ( http://escholarship.org/uc/uclalib_egj ) peer-reviewed professional journal devoted to international environmental topics. Subjects covered include assessment, conservation, development, disposal, education, hazards, pollution, resources, technology, and treatment in the fields of ecology and environmental sciences.

Environmental Science and Technology  (Easton, Pa.: American Chemical Society, 1967– , annual)

Published by one of the oldest scientific associations in the world, Environmental Science and Technology delivers authoritative and comprehensive articles about the latest technological advances, regulations, policies, and scientific research in the environmental arena. Topics in past issues have included everything from air quality modeling, to risk from fine particles, to dioxin risk assessment, to recycled wastewater.

EPA Journal  (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, 1975–95, bimonthly)

First published in 1975, this bimonthly journal, published by the Environmental Protection agency (EPA), offered a national and global perspective on key environmental issues. Articles focused on work within the EPA and federal government and private sector to solve environmental problems. Publication was discontinued with the winter 1995 issue. Full-text articles are available of past journals through WilsonWeb beginning with the September/October 1982 issue.

National Wildlife  (Washington, D.C.: National Wildlife Federation, 1962– , monthly)

Since publication of its first issue in December 1962, this monthly magazine has covered such topics as nature and the environment for conservation-minded readers. Issues feature natural history and outdoor adventure articles, ecological news items, and full-color photo galleries. Content for back issues from the June–July 2005 issue to the present can be viewed at  http://www.nwf.org/Home/News-and-Magazines/National-Wildlife.aspx .

Sierra  (San Francisco, Calif.: Sierra Club, 1893– , bimonthly)

One of the oldest environmental journals in the United States, this award-winning, general-interest environmental magazine, published by the Sierra Club, a San Francisco–based nonprofit group, celebrates the wonders of nature through expertly written and strikingly photographed adventure and travel features. Showcased in each issue are travel destinations in natural settings, products, services, lists of Sierra-sponsored trips, and much more.

Worldwatch  (Washington, D.C.: Worldwatch Institute, 1988– , bimonthly)

Published by the Worldwatch Institute, a Washington, D.C.–based nonprofit environmental advocacy group, this bimonthly magazine focuses on current developments in many related areas. Issues contain articles discussing current environmental trends worldwide, such as climate change, deforestation, population growth, species extinction, and economic and environmental policies.

Selected Web Sites

EnviroLink Network  ( http://envirolink.org/ )

This site, developed by the nonprofit organization EnviroLink, is one of the most comprehensive resources on the Web on the subject of the environment. Access is provided to literally thousands of online environmental resources.

Environmental Defense  ( http://www.edf.org/ )

Founded to “protect human health, restore our oceans and ecosystems, and curb global warming,” this New York–based nonprofit environmental group offers current information on environmental topics.

Environmental News Network  ( http://www.enn.com/ )

Online newspaper featuring environmental news stories, in-depth accounts, press releases, and other information.

Environmental Quality Statistics  (http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/reports/statistics/)

Features statistical tables created by the U.S. Department of Energy and published in its annual report of the Council on Environmental Quality.

Global Warming: Early Warning Signs  ( http://www.climatehotmap.org/ )

This online map illustrates the consequences of global warming and climate changes. Maps are available by region, and the site includes various indicators, references, and teaching resources on the subject.

Know Your Environment  ( http://www.ansp.org/ )

Published by the Environmental Associates in association with the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, this published series offers direct access to articles about natural resources, human influence, public policy, and technology and environment.

MapCruzin.com  ( http://www.mapcruzin.com/index.html )

The home page of the Clary Meuser Research Network, this site provides tools and resources devoted to improving social and environmental conditions.

Center for Climate and Energy Solutions formerly Pew Center on Global Climate Change  ( http://www.c2es.org/ )

Established in 1998 as a nonprofit, nonpartisan, independent organization to address global climate change, the Pew Center offers news, basic information, and in-depth reports about global warming and related environmental issues.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  ( http://www.epa.gov/ )

This official home page of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) offers an abundance of resources, including an excellent data source called EnviroFacts ( http://www.epa.gov/enviro/index.html ).

Water Quality Information Center  ( http://wqic.nal.usda.gov/ )

The National Library of Agriculture Water Quality Information Center page provides electronic access to information about water and agriculture. The site includes links to bibliographies, databases, discussion lists, environmental news, and much more.

World Resource Institute  ( http://www.wri.org/ )

This Web page provides links to topical environmental research facts and figures, special reports, and comprehensive data on a broad array of environmental, economic and social issues.

The World’s Water  ( http://www.worldwater.org/ )

Developed and maintained by the Pacific Institute for Studies in Environment, Development and Security, this Web page presents current information and data on the world’s freshwater resources. Includes links to many organizations, institutions, and individuals working on a wide range of global freshwater problems and solutions.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Methodology – Types, Examples and writing Guide

Research Methodology – Types, Examples and writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Methodology

Definition:

Research Methodology refers to the systematic and scientific approach used to conduct research, investigate problems, and gather data and information for a specific purpose. It involves the techniques and procedures used to identify, collect , analyze , and interpret data to answer research questions or solve research problems . Moreover, They are philosophical and theoretical frameworks that guide the research process.

Structure of Research Methodology

Research methodology formats can vary depending on the specific requirements of the research project, but the following is a basic example of a structure for a research methodology section:

I. Introduction

• Provide an overview of the research problem and the need for a research methodology section
• Outline the main research questions and objectives

II. Research Design

• Explain the research design chosen and why it is appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Discuss any alternative research designs considered and why they were not chosen
• Describe the research setting and participants (if applicable)

III. Data Collection Methods

• Describe the methods used to collect data (e.g., surveys, interviews, observations)
• Explain how the data collection methods were chosen and why they are appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Detail any procedures or instruments used for data collection

IV. Data Analysis Methods

• Describe the methods used to analyze the data (e.g., statistical analysis, content analysis )
• Explain how the data analysis methods were chosen and why they are appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Detail any procedures or software used for data analysis

V. Ethical Considerations

• Discuss any ethical issues that may arise from the research and how they were addressed
• Explain how informed consent was obtained (if applicable)
• Detail any measures taken to ensure confidentiality and anonymity

VI. Limitations

• Identify any potential limitations of the research methodology and how they may impact the results and conclusions

VII. Conclusion

• Summarize the key aspects of the research methodology section
• Explain how the research methodology addresses the research question(s) and objectives

Research Methodology Types

Types of Research Methodology are as follows:

Quantitative Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection and analysis of numerical data using statistical methods. This type of research is often used to study cause-and-effect relationships and to make predictions.

Qualitative Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection and analysis of non-numerical data such as words, images, and observations. This type of research is often used to explore complex phenomena, to gain an in-depth understanding of a particular topic, and to generate hypotheses.

Mixed-Methods Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that combines elements of both quantitative and qualitative research. This approach can be particularly useful for studies that aim to explore complex phenomena and to provide a more comprehensive understanding of a particular topic.

Case Study Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves in-depth examination of a single case or a small number of cases. Case studies are often used in psychology, sociology, and anthropology to gain a detailed understanding of a particular individual or group.

Action Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves a collaborative process between researchers and practitioners to identify and solve real-world problems. Action research is often used in education, healthcare, and social work.

Experimental Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the manipulation of one or more independent variables to observe their effects on a dependent variable. Experimental research is often used to study cause-and-effect relationships and to make predictions.

Survey Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection of data from a sample of individuals using questionnaires or interviews. Survey research is often used to study attitudes, opinions, and behaviors.

Grounded Theory Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the development of theories based on the data collected during the research process. Grounded theory is often used in sociology and anthropology to generate theories about social phenomena.

Research Methodology Example

An Example of Research Methodology could be the following:

Research Methodology for Investigating the Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Reducing Symptoms of Depression in Adults

Introduction:

The aim of this research is to investigate the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) in reducing symptoms of depression in adults. To achieve this objective, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted using a mixed-methods approach.

Research Design:

The study will follow a pre-test and post-test design with two groups: an experimental group receiving CBT and a control group receiving no intervention. The study will also include a qualitative component, in which semi-structured interviews will be conducted with a subset of participants to explore their experiences of receiving CBT.

Participants:

Participants will be recruited from community mental health clinics in the local area. The sample will consist of 100 adults aged 18-65 years old who meet the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the experimental group or the control group.

Intervention :

The experimental group will receive 12 weekly sessions of CBT, each lasting 60 minutes. The intervention will be delivered by licensed mental health professionals who have been trained in CBT. The control group will receive no intervention during the study period.

Data Collection:

Quantitative data will be collected through the use of standardized measures such as the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7). Data will be collected at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at a 3-month follow-up. Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with a subset of participants from the experimental group. The interviews will be conducted at the end of the intervention period, and will explore participants’ experiences of receiving CBT.

Data Analysis:

Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-tests, and mixed-model analyses of variance (ANOVA) to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. Qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic analysis to identify common themes and patterns in participants’ experiences of receiving CBT.

Ethical Considerations:

This study will comply with ethical guidelines for research involving human subjects. Participants will provide informed consent before participating in the study, and their privacy and confidentiality will be protected throughout the study. Any adverse events or reactions will be reported and managed appropriately.

Data Management:

All data collected will be kept confidential and stored securely using password-protected databases. Identifying information will be removed from qualitative data transcripts to ensure participants’ anonymity.

Limitations:

One potential limitation of this study is that it only focuses on one type of psychotherapy, CBT, and may not generalize to other types of therapy or interventions. Another limitation is that the study will only include participants from community mental health clinics, which may not be representative of the general population.

Conclusion:

This research aims to investigate the effectiveness of CBT in reducing symptoms of depression in adults. By using a randomized controlled trial and a mixed-methods approach, the study will provide valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying the relationship between CBT and depression. The results of this study will have important implications for the development of effective treatments for depression in clinical settings.

How to Write Research Methodology

Writing a research methodology involves explaining the methods and techniques you used to conduct research, collect data, and analyze results. It’s an essential section of any research paper or thesis, as it helps readers understand the validity and reliability of your findings. Here are the steps to write a research methodology:

• Start by explaining your research question: Begin the methodology section by restating your research question and explaining why it’s important. This helps readers understand the purpose of your research and the rationale behind your methods.
• Describe your research design: Explain the overall approach you used to conduct research. This could be a qualitative or quantitative research design, experimental or non-experimental, case study or survey, etc. Discuss the advantages and limitations of the chosen design.
• Discuss your sample: Describe the participants or subjects you included in your study. Include details such as their demographics, sampling method, sample size, and any exclusion criteria used.
• Describe your data collection methods : Explain how you collected data from your participants. This could include surveys, interviews, observations, questionnaires, or experiments. Include details on how you obtained informed consent, how you administered the tools, and how you minimized the risk of bias.
• Explain your data analysis techniques: Describe the methods you used to analyze the data you collected. This could include statistical analysis, content analysis, thematic analysis, or discourse analysis. Explain how you dealt with missing data, outliers, and any other issues that arose during the analysis.
• Discuss the validity and reliability of your research : Explain how you ensured the validity and reliability of your study. This could include measures such as triangulation, member checking, peer review, or inter-coder reliability.
• Acknowledge any limitations of your research: Discuss any limitations of your study, including any potential threats to validity or generalizability. This helps readers understand the scope of your findings and how they might apply to other contexts.
• Provide a summary: End the methodology section by summarizing the methods and techniques you used to conduct your research. This provides a clear overview of your research methodology and helps readers understand the process you followed to arrive at your findings.

When to Write Research Methodology

Research methodology is typically written after the research proposal has been approved and before the actual research is conducted. It should be written prior to data collection and analysis, as it provides a clear roadmap for the research project.

The research methodology is an important section of any research paper or thesis, as it describes the methods and procedures that will be used to conduct the research. It should include details about the research design, data collection methods, data analysis techniques, and any ethical considerations.

The methodology should be written in a clear and concise manner, and it should be based on established research practices and standards. It is important to provide enough detail so that the reader can understand how the research was conducted and evaluate the validity of the results.

Applications of Research Methodology

Here are some of the applications of research methodology:

• To identify the research problem: Research methodology is used to identify the research problem, which is the first step in conducting any research.
• To design the research: Research methodology helps in designing the research by selecting the appropriate research method, research design, and sampling technique.
• To collect data: Research methodology provides a systematic approach to collect data from primary and secondary sources.
• To analyze data: Research methodology helps in analyzing the collected data using various statistical and non-statistical techniques.
• To test hypotheses: Research methodology provides a framework for testing hypotheses and drawing conclusions based on the analysis of data.
• To generalize findings: Research methodology helps in generalizing the findings of the research to the target population.
• To develop theories : Research methodology is used to develop new theories and modify existing theories based on the findings of the research.
• To evaluate programs and policies : Research methodology is used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and policies by collecting data and analyzing it.
• To improve decision-making: Research methodology helps in making informed decisions by providing reliable and valid data.

Purpose of Research Methodology

Research methodology serves several important purposes, including:

• To guide the research process: Research methodology provides a systematic framework for conducting research. It helps researchers to plan their research, define their research questions, and select appropriate methods and techniques for collecting and analyzing data.
• To ensure research quality: Research methodology helps researchers to ensure that their research is rigorous, reliable, and valid. It provides guidelines for minimizing bias and error in data collection and analysis, and for ensuring that research findings are accurate and trustworthy.
• To replicate research: Research methodology provides a clear and detailed account of the research process, making it possible for other researchers to replicate the study and verify its findings.
• To advance knowledge: Research methodology enables researchers to generate new knowledge and to contribute to the body of knowledge in their field. It provides a means for testing hypotheses, exploring new ideas, and discovering new insights.
• To inform decision-making: Research methodology provides evidence-based information that can inform policy and decision-making in a variety of fields, including medicine, public health, education, and business.

Advantages of Research Methodology

Research methodology has several advantages that make it a valuable tool for conducting research in various fields. Here are some of the key advantages of research methodology:

• Systematic and structured approach : Research methodology provides a systematic and structured approach to conducting research, which ensures that the research is conducted in a rigorous and comprehensive manner.
• Objectivity : Research methodology aims to ensure objectivity in the research process, which means that the research findings are based on evidence and not influenced by personal bias or subjective opinions.
• Replicability : Research methodology ensures that research can be replicated by other researchers, which is essential for validating research findings and ensuring their accuracy.
• Reliability : Research methodology aims to ensure that the research findings are reliable, which means that they are consistent and can be depended upon.
• Validity : Research methodology ensures that the research findings are valid, which means that they accurately reflect the research question or hypothesis being tested.
• Efficiency : Research methodology provides a structured and efficient way of conducting research, which helps to save time and resources.
• Flexibility : Research methodology allows researchers to choose the most appropriate research methods and techniques based on the research question, data availability, and other relevant factors.
• Scope for innovation: Research methodology provides scope for innovation and creativity in designing research studies and developing new research techniques.

Research Methodology Vs Research Methods

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Limitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

APA Research Paper Format – Example, Sample and...

Thesis Outline – Example, Template and Writing...

Purpose of Research – Objectives and Applications

Data Interpretation – Process, Methods and...

Data Verification – Process, Types and Examples

Science and Technology in the Academic Enterprise: Status, Trends, and Issues (1989)

Chapter: the research environment.

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

EMERGING TRENDS 17 Emerging Trends The ability of universities to broaden their missions and play a larger role in the nation's research enterprise will depend on the resolution of three sources of tension, each pulling at the fabric of the enterprise. The first strain on the enterprise is slow adaptation to an increasingly complex research and educational environment; the organization, culture, and resources of academic institutions and their research sponsors constrain their response to new demands and opportunities. The second source of stress on the enterprise is the replacement of retiring high-quality research personnel during the next decade; it may not be possible, given the current production level of research scientists and engineers. The third source emanates from the need to sustain the quality of current research institutions and programs, which is increasingly expensive to do and—in an era of severely constrained fiscal resources—increasingly difficult. THE RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT The environment in which the academic research community must function will increase in complexity. National and international economic, political, and social cross-currents influence the priorities, topics, and contexts of scientific investigation. These influences are combining to challenge the traditional way scholars and their host institutions operate and relate to each other. Furthermore, many new scientific and technological opportunities require more flexible, cross- disciplinary relationships both within and among universities, industries, and governments. There are many factors at work here. First, important and exciting advances in fundamental science are occurring are creating more complex questions on the research frontier and many of the questions are more frequently in multi-disciplinary settings at the interface between disciplines. Furthermore, some traditional fields, such as molecular biology and microelectronics, are merging with other fields or being redefined. Second, as product life cycles become shorter, advances in fundamental knowledge become more relevant to technology development. As a result, industries, universities, and financial institutions are developing sophisticated relationships that include a multiplicity of formal and informal structures. Some faculty members, for example, are assuming entrepreneurial roles, including developing relationships with non-academic organizations to pursue the commercial development of their research. Third, international cooperation is intensifying in many scientific and engineering fields. The growing research capabilities of other nations provide new opportunities for collaboration—especially in astronomy, oceanography, and high- energy physics—that require large capital investments. International cooperation is also required for research on such problems as global climate change, ozone depletion, and acid rain. New technologies increasingly shape the scholarly agenda in the sciences and engineering. State-of-the-art instrumentation allows for experiments requiring heretofore un-achievable precision and scale. New generations of computers make possible large-scale 

EMERGING TRENDS 18 data analysis and provide the mechanism for rapidly transferring and sharing information among institutions, organizations, and nations. News of new processes and products of scientific research reach an ever-wider U.S. audience. To the extent that popularization contributes to public understanding of science, it enhances political support. But it also brings greater societal scrutiny to the research enterprise. There is, for example, growing public pressure on federal regulatory and grant-making agencies to control the use of toxic substances and radioisotopes, and experiments involving animals. In addition, societal intervention in the research agenda is increasingly exercised through the courts, notably in environmental protection, radiation and carcinogen disposal, and the release of genetically engineered material. In addition to increasing regulatory complexity in some fields, the lack of regulations in other fields is also a problem—often forcing researchers to curtail or abandon lines of inquiry in areas such as biotechnology. The most pronounced recent trend is state and local regulation of research. A few state, county, and city governments have begun to influence the conduct of local university research through controls on the type and location of university facilities and on research protocols, such as the use and care of test animals and the use of genetically altered organisms. Should this trend become more widespread, investigators and their host institutions would have to adapt to a changing array of costly reporting requirements, safeguards, controls, and regulatory supervision. Universities and research sponsors face difficulty in rapidly adapting to a changing research environment. In response to the changing research environment, some members of the academic enterprise are testing innovative strategies for organizing, conducting, managing, and financing research. Rapid adaptation to new demands and opportunities in the research area, however, is slowed by many factors—including tradition, inertia, the competition for university resources, the demands of the university's educational mission, and the aging of faculty—impinging on the current organization, culture, and resources of university-based scholars and their funding agencies. There is growing debate within universities over the ability of the current disciplinary and governance structures to respond adequately to the expanding research agenda, as well as to find an appropriate balance of commitments to scholarship, education, and public service. New research opportunities often require more flexible budgeting and assignment of research faculty, inter-disciplinary approaches, expansion of non-faculty research personnel, extra-departmental initiatives, and allowance for faculty entrepreneurial activity. Furthermore, larger-scale multi-disciplinary research efforts require hierarchical management and more centralized governance structures for rapidly making strategic decisions and for inter- departmental planning. In addition, the intense regulatory environment in many areas of research requires active participation by the institution's administration in deciding faculty research topics and protocols, as well as in serving as a necessary buffer against unwarranted outside interference. On the other hand, the present university disciplinary structure has proved adaptable to new research opportunities and, more importantly, provides a necessary, albeit cumbersome, system for quality control through peer review. Young faculty, who are 

The U.S. academic research enterprise is entering a new era characterized by remarkable opportunities and increased strain. This two-part volume integrates the experiential knowledge of group members with quantitative data analyses in order to examine the status of scientific and technological research in academic settings. Part One reviews the status of the current research enterprise, emerging trends affecting it, and issues central to its future. Part Two is an overview of the enterprise and describes long-term trends in financial and human resources. This new book will be useful in stimulating policy discussions—especially among individuals and organizations that fund or perform academic research.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

Disciplinary Approaches to Composing Texts

Writing in Environmental Science

by Dr. Emily Deaver

Writing is one of the primary forms of communication in Environmental Science. It is important to be able to express yourself clearly regardless of the type of writing you are doing. It is also important to understand what audience you are writing for - a scientific audience or the general public. Communicating results of research by writing papers is critical to advancing the field. You may do Nobel Prize winning work in the lab, but if you never publish a paper on that work then the research will be unknown and essentially worthless. Communicating clearly is also important and relevant to environmental regulations and protection of natural resources, both in terms of advocating for a particular position, educating the general public about natural resources or for proposing specific legislation. 

Types of writing in the field

Writing in the Environmental Science field includes a wide range of styles as well as writing geared toward different audiences. Scholarly writing published in scientific journals is the primary way that researchers communicate and is critical for exchange of information.  These journals are increasingly available online prior to publication in a print format, or even exclusively online.

Environmental writing includes investigative pieces which may focus on discussions of emerging problems, or exposing illegal or unethical practices. These pieces often include facts and data in an effort to communicate new information to the public, or may be more human interest stories that describe specific environmental problems. These stories can be published by newspapers, magazines or broadcast outlets such at National Public Radio. These may be short news style pieces or longer documentaries.

There are numerous environmental magazines like National Parks Magazine, Scientific American, Popular Science, National Geographic and Discover magazine that present news and features stories for the general public in a less technical format and typically include lots of pictures with the articles. There are also a huge number of environmental blogs on the web. Most are designed to provide information as well as encourage readers to become involved in protection and care of the environment (i.e. http://www.theenvironmentalblog.org/ ). 

An additional type of writing would be pieces written for nonprofit conservation organizations like Nature Conservancy , or the World Wildlife Fund . This type of writing often describes a particular landscape, habitat or group of organisms with the aim of getting the reader emotionally invested in the topic. Writing for research stations, such as the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, would be writing that includes reporting on technical research data for the scientific community, but also presenting research data in a less technical way to the general public, with the aim or gaining continued support for their work. 

Federal government agencies such as the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), US Geological Survey (USGS) and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) produce many different types of writing; very technical reports related to research projects, guidance or policy documents on regulations and protection of environmental resources, informational documents to educate the general public, and news releases. Clear written communication is so important that the EPA even has its own writing guide ( https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/stylebook_.html) . Much of this information is available in print form but they also have extensive websites with research reports, information on popular topics and news releases easily accessible. A good example of most of these types of writing can be found at the EPA page on Climate Change ( https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ ). Similar types of writing are done by state (i.e. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, MN Department of Natural Resources, MN Board of Water and Soil Resources) and local agencies (Lyon County Environmental Office) as well. Utility companies (i.e. Marshall Municipal Utilities or Duke Power) and publically owned wastewater treatment facilities produce similar information and types of documents.  

Writers may also work in some type of industry and write industry newsletters and press releases or do technical writing for equipment or consumer products writing procedural manuals, or tutorials and help pages. There are also numerous professional magazines (i.e. Chemical and Engineering News ) that report on new technologies and industry news.

A different type of writing in the environmental field would be nature writers. These works can be environmental fiction (novels or poetry) that describe nature or have plots involving environmental issues (i.e. Wallace Stegner, Wendell Berry and Annie Dillard),) or nonfiction accounts of the wilderness (i.e. Rick Bass and Sigurd F. Olson), writing as an environmental activist (i.e. Lester R. Brown) or  exploring relationships to nature and culture (i.e. Terry Tempest Williams).

Scholarly writing published in scientific journals is the primary way that environmental scientists communicate. All students in Environmental Science should be familiar with, and be able to write in this format. Reporting on scientific information in a less technical fashion to help the general public understand complex scientific issues would be the 2 nd most important type of writing. This information is increasingly important in both paper and electronic formats. 

Writing in the classroom

Depending upon which course they take, students gain experience doing technical writing such as lab reports, research proposals and research papers. These works allow students to practice writing in the style of a published journal article, which is one of the primary forms of communication in the field.  Students also learn to create annotated bibliographies, which teaches them to find and read journal articles and to summarize information from those articles for later reference. This is particularly important when gathering information for research projects. 

Many of the things Environmental Science students and scientists write are lab reports, research reports, and journal articles. A lab report (or journal article) is an example of technical writing, which is different from prose or expository writing (for an English class, for example).  The goal of a lab report is to state facts, procedures, processes, and concepts as clearly as possible. The writer’s opinions or feelings about the process are NOT included, and should be concealed in a scientific paper.

Good technical writing is: clear (not diffuse, vague, or general), accurate (data honestly gathered, accurately reported, edited and proof-read to ensure that it is error-free), concise (not wordy), conventional and consistent (following accepted patterns for reporting information consistently throughout), mechanically correct (proper grammar, spelling and usage), and interesting (has enough stylistic character to be interesting as well as informative to the reader). 

Some of the keys to good scientific writing in general are:

1. Avoid sentence fragments and run-on sentences.

2. Keep tense, person and number consistent within sections.

3. Avoid long words when short ones will do the job equally well. Avoid wordiness, redundancy, clichés, jargon (gobbledygook), overblown phrases and misused words.

4. Keep ideas together within paragraphs of moderate length and make clear transitions between paragraphs.

5. Write naturally while remaining detached from the subject (objective).

6. Concentrate on clarity and coherence.

7. Use graphs for clarity, simplification, emphasis, or summary.

8. Do not excuse, diminish or find fault with the study. Let the reader judge the quality and significance of the study. 

Parts of the Lab Report, Research Report or Journal Article

The elements of the laboratory report (or journal article) are: title (and author), introduction, methods, results, discussion and literature cited (references) sections. Occasionally a lab report may include an abstract and acknowledgments section.

The introduction describes what you planned to do and why. It includes a statement of the problem or question to be studied, and an explanation of why the knowledge gained by this research is of interest and to whom. An introduction includes a hypothesis, or educated guess, as to the process by which the phenomenon under investigation operates. Available background references are used (and cited) to indicate the importance of the research, and to provide information that allows the author to predict an outcome. You should also define any terms in the introduction section.

The methods section is a concise description, written in the past tense, of the procedures used. It describes the equipment used and how information was collected: by laboratory or field experimentation, surveys, or literature review. This section contains the most explicit (exactly described) statements of how you did the experiment or study. The methods section should contain enough detail for someone else to repeat the study based on the description in the paper. The methods section does NOT include a list of the materials used. Any equipment and materials used are described along with the procedures. 

The results section describes what you found out. This section is a presentation and organization of the information (facts, data, and measurements) collected in the study. Often the data is organized into tables and graphs. Graphs and tables are never presented alone - they are used in addition to the text, or descriptive paragraph of the results. The results section simply presents the data, but no explanations or statements about why the researcher thinks the results occurred as they did are provided (that is given in the discussion section).

The discussion section includes explicit statements of what the results mean in a logically unfolding pattern. This section includes statements about why the researcher thinks the results occurred as they did (based on literature or previous studies), and what the results reveal about the way nature works. The discussion section also contains any conclusions or recommendations. It may also include statements about particular sources of error in the study and what the next set of experiments would be to gain further information on this topic.

A laboratory report should contain all of the sections discussed above plus a title that describes the experiment or study. Following the title is the author’s name . References are used to substantiate statements made in the introduction, methods or discussion sections of the lab report. Any references used need to be cited correctly - both in the text of the report (author and year) and at the end of the report in a literature cited section (see the handout on citations for details on the format to use).

Environmental Science Disciplinary Perspective Documentation in Environmental Science Research in Environmental Science Reading in Environmental Science

• Introduction to the Text
• Writing is Important in your Major
• Advice from Students
• Making Your Writing Work: Ethos & Commonplaces
• Professional Associations
• Scholarship as Conversation
• Genres and Finding Sources
• Genres, Metagenres, and the Rhetorical Situation
• Analyzing Scholarly, Trade, and Popular Sources
• Library Research Overview
• Introduction To Research
• Research Process
• Choosing a Topic
• Determining Genres
• Trouble Finding Sources
• Videos Overview
• Special Education
• Annotated Writing Samples
• Agricultural Education Overview
• Documentation
• Scholarly Writing Sample
• Business Administration Overview
• Communication Studies Overview
• Student Writing Sample
• Computer Science Overview
• Education Overview
• Environmental Science Overview
• Exercise Science Overview
• History Overview
• Justice Administration Overview
• Literary Studies Overview
• Marketing Overview
• Math Overview
• Nursing Overview
• Philosophy Overview
• Professional Writing and Communication Overview
• Videos (English)
• Social Work Overview
• Special Education Overview

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• 10 Research Question Examples to Guide Your Research Project

10 Research Question Examples to Guide your Research Project

Published on October 30, 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on October 19, 2023.

The research question is one of the most important parts of your research paper , thesis or dissertation . It’s important to spend some time assessing and refining your question before you get started.

The exact form of your question will depend on a few things, such as the length of your project, the type of research you’re conducting, the topic , and the research problem . However, all research questions should be focused, specific, and relevant to a timely social or scholarly issue.

Once you’ve read our guide on how to write a research question , you can use these examples to craft your own.

Note that the design of your research question can depend on what method you are pursuing. Here are a few options for qualitative, quantitative, and statistical research questions.

Other interesting articles

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

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.

McCombes, S. (2023, October 19). 10 Research Question Examples to Guide your Research Project. Scribbr. Retrieved September 1, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-question-examples/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to choose a dissertation topic | 8 steps to follow, evaluating sources | methods & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

PSYC 210: Foundations of Psychology

• Tips for Searching for Articles

What is a literature review?

Conducting a literature review, organizing a literature review, writing a literature review, helpful book.

• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Google Scholar

A  literature review  is a compilation of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works.

• Summarizes and analyzes previous research relevant to a topic
• Includes scholarly books and articles published in academic journals
• Can be an specific scholarly paper or a section in a research paper

The objective of a Literature Review is to find previous published scholarly works relevant to an specific topic

• Help gather ideas or information
• Keep up to date in current trends and findings
• Help develop new questions

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area
• Helps focus your own research questions or problems
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas
• Suggests unexplored ideas or populations
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic
• Tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias
• Identifies critical gaps, points of disagreement, or potentially flawed methodology or theoretical approaches

Source: "What is a Literature Review?", Old Dominion University,  https://guides.lib.odu.edu/c.php?g=966167&p=6980532

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question. 

Your literature review should be guided by a central research question. It represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted, and analyzed by you in a synthesized way. 

• Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.
• Write down terms that are related to your question for they will be useful for searches later. 

2. Decide on the scope of your review. 

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover? 

• This may depend on your assignment.
• Consider these things when planning your time for research. 

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches. 

• By Research Guide 

4. Conduct your searches and find the literature. 

• Review the abstracts carefully - this will save you time!
• Many databases will have a search history tab for you to return to for later.
• Use bibliographies and references of research studies to locate others.
• Use citation management software such as Zotero to keep track of your research citations. 

5. Review the literature. 

Some questions to help you analyze the research: 

• What was the research question you are reviewing? What are the authors trying to discover? 
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings? 
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze the literature review, samples and variables used, results, and conclusions. Does the research seem complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise? 
• If there are conflicted studies, why do you think that is? 
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Are they experts or novices? Has the study been cited? 

Source: "Literature Review", University of West Florida,  https://libguides.uwf.edu/c.php?g=215113&p=5139469

A literature review is not a summary of the sources but a synthesis of the sources. It is made up of the topics the sources are discussing. Each section of the review is focused on a topic, and the relevant sources are discussed within the context of that topic. 

1. Select the most relevant material from the sources

• Could be material that answers the question directly
• Extract as a direct quote or paraphrase 

2. Arrange that material so you can focus on it apart from the source text itself

• You are now working with fewer words/passages
• Material is all in one place

3. Group similar points, themes, or topics together and label them 

• The labels describe the points, themes, or topics that are the backbone of your paper’s structure

4. Order those points, themes, or topics as you will discuss them in the paper, and turn the labels into actual assertions

• A sentence that makes a point that is directly related to your research question or thesis 

This is now the outline for your literature review. 

Source: "Organizing a Review of the Literature – The Basics", George Mason University Writing Center,  https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/writing-resources/research-based-writing/organizing-literature-reviews-the-basics

• Literature Review Matrix Here is a template on how people tend to organize their thoughts. The matrix template is a good way to write out the key parts of each article and take notes. Downloads as an XLSX file.

The most common way that literature reviews are organized is by theme or author. Find a general pattern of structure for the review. When organizing the review, consider the following: 

• the methodology 
• the quality of the findings or conclusions
• major strengths and weaknesses
• any other important information

Writing Tips: 

• Be selective - Select only the most important points in each source to highlight in the review. It should directly relate to the review's focus.
• Use quotes sparingly.
• Keep your own voice - Your voice (the writer's) should remain front and center. .   
• Aim for one key figure/table per section to illustrate complex content, summarize a large body of relevant data, or describe the order of a process
• Legend below image/figure and above table and always refer to them in text 

Source: "Composing your Literature Review", Florida A&M University,  https://library.famu.edu/c.php?g=577356&p=3982811

• << Previous: Tips for Searching for Articles
• Next: Citing Your Sources >>
• Last Updated: Aug 21, 2024 3:43 PM
• URL: https://infoguides.pepperdine.edu/PSYC210

Explore. Discover. Create.

Copyright ©  2022  Pepperdine University

Sabine Müller

On creating a good research environment

31 March 2021 | doi:10.5281/zenodo.463628 | 1 Comment

Sabine Müller on the hierarchical system of German academia and why it could be a problem for the wellbeing of young academics and Ph.D. candidates. She compares it to her experiences at Oxford University and sheds light on the differences between the two research cultures.

“Researchers say that their working culture is best when it is collaborative, inclusive, supportive and creative, when researchers are given time to focus on their research priorities, when leadership is transparent and open, and when individuals have a sense of safety and security. But too often research culture is not at its best.” [“What researchers think about the culture they work in”, Wellcome Trust and Shift Learning (London 2020), p. 3 (subsequently referred to as “What researchers think”)] The executive summary of the 2020 Wellcome Trust study on research culture goes on to describe how “many [researchers] are often missing out on critical aspects of good management … [a]nd worse, many have experienced exploitation, discrimination, harassment and bullying.” Notably, members of minority groups more often experience the latter. These results echo those of previous surveys, such as those conducted by Advance HE or the journal Nature in the UK – and which illustrate that these issues are on the radar of public debate. (Woolston, 2019) The situation in Germany is hardly any different, though of course data in Germany is scarce and hardly sufficient to make any reliable statements about early career researchers’ emotional situation. (Most notably, the German Centre for High Education Research and Science Studies (DZHW) runs a National Academics Panel Study since 2017 which promises to give further data on the condition and well-being of doctoral researchers.) Notably, existing studies are frequently a reaction to incidents that reached public attention (Albott, 2019), or rely on surveys by the concerned group such as by the networks of doctoral researchers of non-university research organisations. Accordingly, the existence of guidelines for managing power abuse or mental health are confined to institutions which have struggled with cases. Otherwise the silence on the topic by reputable research organisations such as the DFG or the academies is overwhelming . The reasons for this gap may be manifold. German academia is not immune to the complex range of problems such as non-transparent leadership, a lack of inclusiveness, harassment or mental health issues which resist a positive research culture. Each of these issues by themselves has numerous causes, but all of them are amplified by a system which lays “an excessive focus on measuring performance” as well as institutional structures such as the accumulation of responsibilities and decision making as well as steep hierarchies. (Shore & Wright, 1999) It is the latter aspects which I would like to focus on as crucial elements required in order to foster a cultural change for a positive research environment, and which, compared to the bigger systemic issues could be rather easily fixed.

As a career development adviser in Germany, I was frequently confronted with the following “argument” during discussions with senior researchers about the working conditions of early career researchers: “It was like this when I did my PhD, so why should that not work nowadays?” I always wondered what exactly this was meant to say? Unpacking this claim to myself it seems to implicitly suggest 1) the person, too, did not attain their PhD in good conditions, 2) but the fact that they succeeded makes them think that it was not so bad after all. Is the rationale behind this that a “rough school” toughens people up to prepare them for academic life? In fact, I often also heard that doctoral researchers today are not only too sensitive but too demanding. But is the consequence that only people who are willing to toughen up stay in academia? Besides the questionable psychological rationale, I wonder whether we really think that this is what academia needs: tough personalities? Putting aside the universe of unconscious biases which is touched by such a question, shouldn’t academic work and life not be guided – even more than any other branches of the labour market – by the principle of reason, multiperspectivity, openness, integrity and such, rather than of the dull workings of unconscious bias and self-perpetuation? And should the system not aim to do everything for those qualities to be able to unfold and thrive? Responding to such a statement from my own personal experience, I often felt awkward since I did not share this experience. And this difference in the culture of dealing with issues such as discrimination, mental health, diversity and welfare, as well as power abuse has struck me most notably upon my return to Germany after I had spent eight years at the University of Oxford taking up a position in career development in a research organisation. My experience during my doctoral and postdoctoral research was a very positive one – in many respects, I had the time of my life – and I felt that encouraging people to create an environment for such a good experience would be crucial. In the following piece, I focus on some landmarks of this positive (!) experience in my academic career in order to point to how a fundamental change of culture needs to be human centered, and attend to individual experience. 

I was granted a first memorable insight into a different mind-set before I left for my one year Master’s, which led to my doctoral research at the University of Oxford. I was confronted with the choice between 32 colleges. I was inclined to apply at the college to which my future supervisor was affiliated – a thought which very much agreed with the logic of the German system I was socialized in where doctoral researchers are frequently not only naturally affiliated with the “Lehrstuhl” of their supervisors but also seem to enter into a sort of patronship relation expressed in the still prevalent German term “Doktorvater/-mutter”. However, my supervisor asked me to consider that in case of disagreement or conflict, it would be advantageous to be able to have an independent college adviser to turn to. The sense of responsibility expressed in this thoughtfulness with respect to providing an environment to my advantage profoundly shaped my own actions along the subsequent years as doctoral and postdoctoral researcher, as senior subject tutor and lecturer at Oxford University and beyond. Supervision training might help, but can only partly address the care at work here. The ambition to promote your doctoral researcher, so that s/he can realise her/his potential is connected to a sense of duty to pay attention to the welfare of your supervisee. This attention is promoted and aided by structural aspects. Beside my supervisor – who I am lucky to say was a most conscious and inspiring researcher with whom I met every other week, and who conscientiously read every essay, chapter or anything else I ever submitted – I was then assigned a college adviser. In my case this person was an éminence grise in my field who, as tradition would have it, invited me to a talk at the fireplace and imparted his wisdom to me – and, last but not least, a faculty adviser who was there to offer further opportunities to talk about the programme of my thesis and to whom both my supervisor and I had to submit a progress report by the end of each term. Moreover, the degree at Oxford has a clear milestone system in which supervision and assessment are separated from each other: the vivas for the transfer of status as “Probationer Research Student” to DPhil Candidate after one year into your degree as well as the confirmation of status after two years is taken by two faculty members. The assessment of the submitted final dissertation lies in the hands of an internal and external examiner. This way of organization ensures that the role of the supervisor is focused to act as adviser and to support their supervisee as best as they can. Of course, this means some control for the supervision process: Failure to bring your supervisee to successfully finish their degree will not have consequences for any academic but is not as easily obscured by the possibility to drag the doctoral research on or by marking the thesis accordingly. At the same time, the shared roles opened the opportunity for me, as the supervisee to connect and frankly discuss with other senior academics who took my work seriously. 

Thus, the transparency of a clear milestone system, which details what is expected from the student as well as the separation of the roles of supervision, monitoring and assessment, has the potential to minimise the risk of power abuse and lifts the weight from the relation between supervisors from the start. It affords the supervisee the opportunity to discuss her or his work throughout the process with various researchers, to gain more perspectives and develop an independence of thought and a network from the get-go. Combined with the opportunity to frequently share your intellectual thoughts with established experts in your field and beyond made doctoral and postdoctoral research particularly worthwhile.

I would like to add that as a senior subject tutor for German Studies I experienced the advantages of this disentanglement of examination and supervision for myself: the faculty assigns a committee which designs the end of year exams. Marking and assessment were organised anonymously in an annual rotating system of examiners. Both procedures entail multiple advantages: not only do they limit the power of tutor or supervisor but they also relieve both from that burden of power. Not being the examiner, you can truly fulfil the role as adviser, coach and teacher and accompany your students along their development. Reaching out to your tutor or supervisor is easier, if you do not have to fear any repercussion on your performance. In this context, I also learned to appreciate the carefully built college and university community which provided a network to support students and lecturers alike. It ranges from the so-called common rooms with their mentor for freshers and trained peer advisers to college and university counsellors as well support staff for people of various religious and ethnical background on campus. Coming from a German university, this amount of attention and care which unloaded over my head was at first rather overwhelming and I confess I thought it unnecessary. But over the years, I learned to appreciate this culture which aspired to keep people well and enable them to enjoy their time at the university. Especially later, as a senior subject tutor, when my contract stated in no uncertain terms that tasks comprised the welfare of my students, this community recognised the limits of my competencies and acknowledged the need for welfare offers. 

Another major landmark remains the handling of admission and application procedures. Perhaps it is worth explaining that student admissions at Oxford is a highly professional and formal process which stretches over two weeks in December after the autumn term. Not only are we dealing with standardised applications which aim to highlight the potential of each candidate. Each applicant invited to interviews has the right to get at least two interviews with different academics to assess their performance. In fact, it is a very intricate system with the objective to select students with high potential, no matter their background. In my first year, I was asked to write the protocol for admission interviews and even for that rather small task, I had to complete an online course on legal liabilities, correct interview methods, harassment, discrimination and the mechanism of unconscious bias. As senior subject tutor responsible for admissions in your subject area, I had to take another, more extensive course with on- and offline elements. These courses were a necessary eye-opener to topics which had never been addressed, even in the student council of my German university. It set my expectations of what I consider to be a professional application procedure and to this day I find it hard to accept that none of this type of elementary interview training, which raises awareness of everyone’s unconscious blind spots concerning bias and awareness, is a required standard at German universities or research organisations. It would be easy to implement part of a structured onboarding for each and every academic at the university and at least make the recruiting procedure a bit fairer. 

To sum up, I would like to make clear that I am aware that problems prevail in the UK, as the quoted Wellcome Trust study illustrates. I also want to point out that reason why welfare at Oxford and Cambridge is paid such attention is not entirely altruistic: for a long time, these Universities had to deal with the reproach of higher suicide rates – a critique which cannot be sustained (Hawton et al., 2012).  In addition, it is often pointed out that these institutions are only accessible to elites, which, at an undergraduate level, is very true. At the same time, Oxbridge institutions  understand that in order to attract the best academics they have to cater to people’s wellbeing as human beings in every aspect. So strategic deliberations and monetary concerns are certainly central drivers for the implementation. However, this does not devalue the learnings from such an experience: a collaborative, open, transparent and overall friendly environment relies on the mind-set of the academics who acknowledge the responsibility for their supervisees. This mind-set is supported by structures that foster transparency, independence and exchange by clearly laying out the demands and milestones of a doctoral course (without the need to make people go back to school) by separating the roles of supervision, monitoring and assessment, by carefully building a community with low-threshold support structures catering to various backgrounds as well as training to raise awareness to biases, harassment, stress symptoms etc. None of these suggestions are new but maybe not enough people have experienced how powerful they can be in their small workings and, thus, not enough people can or want to pass on this kind of experience.

Albott, Alison: Germany’s prestigious Max Planck Society investigates new allegations of abuse, in Nature (online) (9 July 2019) https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05668-y / doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05668-y

Hawton K., Bergen H et.al : University Students over a 30-years period, in Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemology 47 (2012), p.43-51, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-010-0310-3 (a summary is provided: https://www.psych.ox.ac.uk/publications/168323 ). Further information can be obtained at the Office for National statistics :

Shore, C., & Wright, S. (1999). Audit Culture and Anthropology: Neo-Liberalism in British Higher Education. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 5(4), 557-575. doi: 10.2307/2661148 See also:  “A cry for help”, in Nature 575 (14 November 2019), p.257-258: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03489-1

Woolston, Cristof: PhDs: torturous truths, in Nature 575 (13 November 2019), p.403-406 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03459-7

Thanks for this, Sabine. You very well present the PhD scholar’s perspective. From a professor’s or supervisor’s perspective it is in my view even worse. I remember one of my first PhD examinations in Germany – not as a supervisor. I thought the PhD was really poor and wanted to be nice and make it pass but give it a very bad mark. I talk to a colleagues about this and she adviced me “Are you crazy, you cannot do that!! His supervisor will interpret this as an open war”. I learnt that the assessment of a PhD candidate is also assessment of the supervisor, so if you want to punish a colleague who has not supported you in another situation, you can do it by marking his candidate poorly. The other way around as well, of course: you’ll give high marks to the the PhD candidates of your friends. You can imagine yourself what kind of informal “economy” that goes on among supervisors/professors. I have been part of many PhD examinations, and I tell you that there is no system at all of good candidates getting good marks and bad candidates getting bad marks. What is negotiated at a PhD examination is very much the standing of the professors and their interrelations. A feudal system.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

First we need to confirm, that you're human. eighty six + = ninety six

Author info

Sabine Müller is currently Adviser for Education and Participation in the Digital World at Wikimedia Deutschland. Before, she was a research consultant for humanities and educational research as well as career development at the head office of the Leibniz Association. She holds a DPhil from Oxford University where she also worked as senior subject tutor for German Studies at St John’s and Magdalen College as well as affiliate postdoc on embodied cognition and narration.

Writing a Paper about an Environmental Issue

• Homework Tips
• Learning Styles & Skills
• Study Methods
• Time Management
• Private School
• College Admissions
• College Life
• Graduate School
• Business School
• Distance Learning

• Ph.D., Wildlife Ecology, University of Maine
• M.A., Natural Resources, Humboldt State University
• B.S., Biology, Université du Québec à Rimouski

Are you a student tasked with writing a research paper on an environmental issue? These few tips, along with some hard and focused work, should get you most of the way there.

Find a Topic

Look for a topic that speaks to you, that grabs your attention. Alternatively, choose a topic about which you are genuinely interested in learning more. It will be a lot easier to spend time working on something of interest to you.

Here are some places you can find ideas for a paper:

• Global warming
• Biodiversity
• Deforestation
• Fossil fuels
• Water Pollution
• The science or environment sections of major newspapers and news organizations will feature articles about current environmental news and events.
• Environmental news websites like Grist or Environmental News Network .

Conduct Research

Are you using internet resources? Make sure you can assess the quality of the information you find. This article from Purdue University’s Online Writing Lab is useful to help with assessing the quality of your sources.

Print resources are not to be neglected. Visit your school or city library, learn how to use their search engine, and talk to your librarian about accessing the resources available.

Are you expected to constrain your sources to primary literature? That body of knowledge consists of peer-reviewed articles published in scientific journals. Consult your librarian for help with accessing the proper databases to reach those articles.

Follow Instructions

Carefully read the handout or prompt given to you and which contains instructions about the assignment. Early in the process, make sure you choose a topic that will satisfy the assigned requirements. Once half-way through the paper, and once when it’s done, check it against the instructions to make sure you didn’t drift away from what was required.

Start With a Solid Structure

First craft a paper outline with your main ideas organized, and a thesis statement . A logical outline will make it easy to gradually flesh out ideas and eventually produce complete paragraphs with good transitions between them. Make sure all the sections serve the purpose of the paper outlined in the thesis statement.

After you have a good draft produced, put the paper down, and don’t pick it up until the next day. It’s due tomorrow? Next time, start working on it earlier. This break will help you with the editing stage: you need fresh eyes to read, and re-read your draft for flow, typos, and a myriad other little problems.

Pay Attention to Formatting

Along the way, check that you are following your teacher’s formatting instructions: font size, line spacing, margins, length, page numbers, title page, etc. A poorly formatted paper will suggest to your teacher that not only the form, but the content is of low quality as well.

Avoid Plagiarism

First, make sure you know what plagiarism is , you can then more easily avoid it. Pay especially close attention to properly attributing the work you cite.

• 10 Tips for the SAT Essay
• How to Double Space Your Paper
• How to Organize Research Notes
• Lining Up Dots in a Table of Contents
• Newspaper Sections and Terms
• Turabian Style Guide With Examples
• The Difference Between Revising and Editing
• How to Use a Thesaurus
• How to Help Your 4th Grader Write a Biography
• Formatting Papers in Chicago Style
• College School Supplies List
• Writing the Parts of a Stage Play Script
• What Is a Blue Book?
• How to Solve Common Keyboard and Typing Problems
• Fourth Grade School Supplies List
• 18 Ways to Practice Spelling Words

Research environment

ORI  Introduction  to RCR: Chapter 7. Mentor and Trainee Responsibilities

University of Michigan Mentoring Guidelines

Email Updates

Improving research environments

Creating a healthier future for everyone depends on thriving research environments that enable open, engaged, equitable, ethical and efficient research.

• Share with Facebook
• Share with X
• Share with LinkedIn
• Share with Email

Excellent research happens in environments where people from all backgrounds are treated with respect, supported and enabled to thrive.

It requires attention to ethical, social and cultural considerations, and engagement with the needs and perspectives of relevant communities.

We believe that creative and high-quality ideas must be open and accessible to everyone to drive innovation and achieve the most significant impact.

These values cut across everything we do and everyone we work with. They are at the heart of the positive and inclusive research culture we want to encourage with our funding so that:

• the research that we support is strengthened by being ethical, open and engaged
• the people we fund thrive in equitable, diverse and supportive research cultures
• Wellcome is known as an innovative, efficient and inclusive partner and organisation

By taking a holistic view of the environmental factors that impact research outcomes, Wellcome can achieve its ambition to be an inclusive funder of research to improve health for everyone.

Hannah Hope

Open Research Lead

Our approach  

Improving research environments is a priority that cuts across all of Wellcome’s funding teams, underpinning our work on  discovery research ,  climate and health ,  infectious disease  and  mental health . 

We also aim to contribute to the broader research ecosystem to ensure that Wellcome researchers have access to the resources, tools, and skills to pursue their work in ways that produce better evidence and meaningful impacts. This includes convening community events, doing policy work, investing in infrastructure, commissioning research and occasionally, offering funding for relevant activities.

Our activities aim to: 

• ensure that research is guided by and responsive to the needs and views of people involved in, or impacted by the work  
• navigate the complexities of innovation and encourage ethical, transformative research  
• openly share ideas, data and findings to speed up progress, enable reproducible research, and reduce duplication
• shape research culture and communities so that researchers from all backgrounds can thrive as they pursue bold ideas
• generate evidence and metascience on funding practices

Our work in action  

Europe pmc (pubmed central).

We are a funder of Europe PMC which provides an online database offering free access to published biomedical research.

Global Health Bioethics Network (GHBN)

We helped to establish the GHBN, which brings together bioethics scholars from across the world to collaborate on exciting ethics research and support early-career bioethicists.

National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement (NCCPE)

The NCCPE promotes high-quality and equitable approaches to engagement across the knowledge sector. It is co-funded by Wellcome, Research England and UKRI.

Research on Research Institute (RoRI)

We support the RoRI, which generates insights on how to improve funding and assess innovative models for research funding.

Accelerator Awards

We launched this award to provide flexible funding for researchers of Black, Bangladeshi and Pakistani heritage in the UK to undertake activities that will help them reach their next career stage.

Institutional Fund for Research Culture (IFRC)

Wellcome's Institutional Fund for Research Culture supports initiatives to improve research culture at institutions across the UK and Ireland.

In2Research

We help fund this social mobility programme that supports people from low socio-economic backgrounds to progress to postgraduate research.

Investigating the effects of open sharing commitments

We commissioned a report to explore the impact of calls to rapidly and openly share Covid-19 research findings to inform public health response.

Research culture across Africa

We commissioned this research to understand what constitutes a “positive and inclusive” research culture in Africa.

How this applies to your research  

You can expect to find questions about research environment within the funding criteria for most of our awards. You should be able to demonstrate how your research is open, ethical and engaged, as well as describe how you will foster a positive and inclusive research culture.

Wellcome also has several research policies related to open and ethical research , and we recommend that researchers consult these when designing funding applications and delivering successful awards.

Looking for research funding?

Wellcome does not have specific funding for research environment; however, it is a theme in all research grant funding and is often a criterion in other procurement processes.

Dan O’Connor

Head of Research Environment

Carleigh Krubiner

Bioethics Lead

Shomari Lewis-Wilson

Senior Manager, Research Culture and Communities

If you have general enquiries or ideas related to our Research Environment work, please contact us on

[email protected]

Related content  

Diversity and inclusion: helping more ideas thrive

Let's reimagine how we work together

Open research

• Undergraduate study
• Find a course
• Open days and visits
• New undergraduates
• Postgraduate study
• Find a programme
• Visits and open days
• New postgraduates
• International students
• Accommodation
• Schools & faculties
• Business & partnerships
• Current students
• Current staff

Academic Quality and Policy Office

• Academic Integrity
• Academic Student Support
• Assessment and Feedback
• Committees and groups
• Degree Outcomes Statement
• Educational Partnerships
• Guidance for Doctoral Training Entities
• Guidance for PGR supervisors
• PGR examiners' guidance
• Area A: Contents page
• Area B: PGR programmes, registration and the period of study
• Area C: PGR student entitlements and responsibilities 
• Area D: PGR skills development and the research environment
• Area E: PGR supervision
• Area F: PGR progress and review arrangements
• Area G: PGR dissertations, examinations, and outcomes 
• Programme and Unit Development and Approval
• Quality Framework
• Student Surveys
• Undergraduate Education
• Unit feedback from students

Related links

• Education and Student Success
• Bristol Institute For Learning and Teaching
• QAA Quality Code

Education and Student Success intranet

University home > Academic Quality and Policy Office > Postgraduate Education > Regulations and code of practice for research degree programmes > Area D: PGR skills development and the research environment

PGR skills development and the research environment

The regulations in this section set out the requirements for supporting PGR students in developing their skills and having access to an appropriate research environment.

On this page

Support for pgr student development, minimum requirements for skills development, expectations on access to the research environment.

The policy on PGR personal and professional development also relates to this section.

8.1. The University recognises the importance of training and development opportunities for PGR students within a high-quality research environment. These opportunities can enhance a PGR student’s effectiveness as a researcher and can underpin their subsequent career.

8.2. A PGR student’s training and development opportunities must be tailored to their needs, and will include activities provided by schools, faculties, and the personal and professional development programme . Some training and development opportunities might be provided by external sources.

8.3. Supervisors must provide guidance and support for PGR students on training and development opportunities with the expectation that the student will progressively take ownership of their own personal and professional development.

8.4. A PGR student must have access to relevant training and development opportunities in research skills and techniques, as well as in wider personal and professional development.

8.5. Supervisors must consider their PGR student’s training and development needs and assist them in identifying relevant activities at the beginning of the student’s period of study. Supervisors and the student must regularly review the student’s training and development needs.

8.6. Funded PGR students must complete any specific training required by their funder. The supervisors and student must ensure that any funder requirements for training are met within an appropriate timeframe.

8.7. The University provides a high-quality research environment in which PGR students develop their skills and conduct work on their research projects.

8.8. Schools and faculties must ensure that PGR students have access to an appropriate research environment, including the following:

8.8.1. Opportunities to interact with research-active staff in the student’s research area within the University and more widely.

8.8.2. Opportunities to experience and contribute to research activities within the school and faculty, such as presenting research at school seminars.

8.8.3. Access to any necessary facilities or resources to support the student’s work. PGR students who are working remotely must retain access to any required facilities or resources.

8.8.4. Access to any external facilities, resources, or expertise that is required for the student’s work and that cannot be provided from within the University.

University of Bristol Beacon House Queens Road Bristol, BS8 1QU, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 928 9000 Contact us

Information for

• New students

Connect with us

Study at bristol.

• Students' Union
• Sport, exercise and health
• Find a researcher
• Faculty research
• Impact of our research
• Research quality and assessment
• Engaging with the public

About the University

• Maps and travel
• Tours and visits
• The University on film
• Explore the city of Bristol
• Board of Trustees

Support the University

• Alumni and friends
• Working at Bristol
• Job listings

A–Z of the University

• Terms and conditions
• Accessibility statements
• Privacy and cookie policy
• Modern Slavery statement
• © 2024 University of Bristol

The Penn Libraries has built a new, user-focused library catalog, with a simpler look and easier search features. Explore it at find.library.upenn.edu .

Research and Write Effectively: Dissertation, Thesis, Term paper

Working on a doctoral dissertation, a master's thesis, a senior capstone, or an undergraduate term paper? Meet with a subject librarian to refine your research question, design a literature review search, learn about research methods, and connect to tools for qualitative and quantitative analysis.  

Book a consultation

Consult with a Librarian

Students are invited to meet with their subject librarian to receive help with:

• Refining a research topic
• Accessing guidance about qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research design
• Locating collections of primary sources and secondary datasets
• Constructing and documenting a literature search strategy
• Evaluating the credibility of sources
• Learning about software options for gathering, storing, and analyzing data
• Using citation style guides to give credit to sources 

Not sure who to contact? Chat with us online , or request a consultation to be matched with a specialist.

More Services

Looking for more ways to get help with your research? Check out these services.

Identify Resources: Search Skills and Techniques

Read and write critically: information literacy, upcoming events.

Research Basics

Learn fundamental skills for gathering literature relevant to any research project.

• 4:00pm - 5:00pm
• Goldstein Electronic Classroom, Room 114, Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center

Reference Management Workshop

Learn how to use the popular citation management tool Zotero to keep track of your sources as you research and easily cite sources as you are writing.

• 1:00pm - 2:00pm
• Gershwind & Bennett Family Collaborative Classroom, Holman Biotech Commons

In this workshop, we will walk you through the basics of using Zotero to save and organize sources as well as generate citations. 

• 11:00am - 12:30pm
• Graduate Student Center, 3615 Locust Walk, Third Floor, Room 304
• Get Expert Help
• Undergraduates
• Graduate Students

IEEE Account

• Change Username/Password
• Update Address

Purchase Details

• Payment Options
• Order History
• View Purchased Documents

Profile Information

• Communications Preferences
• Profession and Education
• Technical Interests
• US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333
• Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060
• Contact & Support
• About IEEE Xplore
• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Nondiscrimination Policy
• Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. © Copyright 2024 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.

Unicaf Scholarships offer students the opportunity to further their education with affordable, high-quality degrees

• Global Network
• Recognition, Accreditation and Memberships

Study through Unicaf with one of its partner universities

• University Partners
• Programme Finder
• Professional Courses
• Graduation Ceremonies
• Online Experience
• On-campus Teaching
• Student Testimonials
• Global Organisation
• Our Faculty
• Programme Advising
• News & Events
• Unicaf in 5 Minutes
• The Unicaf Mobile App
• Virtual Learning Environment
• Online Learning

Amazing Opportunity to earn a Scholarship

• Apply For A Unicaf Scholarship
• Scholarship
• Unicaf Referral Programme
• Corporate Scholarship Scheme

Research with us

• Research Agenda
• Research Centres Unicaf Research and Innovation Centre in Zambia Research Centre in Malawi
• Doctoral Research Groups
• Research Newsletter
• Unicaf Online Journal
• Conferences Unicaf University Graduate Conference (UGraC) Unicaf Master’s Conference (UMC) Unicaf University National Symposium on Dementia in Zambia
• Thesis Publications
• Publications Faculty Students/Alumni
• Scholarships
• Research Centres
• Unicaf Research and Innovation Centre in Zambia
• Research Centre in Malawi
• Conferences
• Unicaf University Graduate Conference (UGraC)
• Unicaf Master’s Conference (UMC)
• Unicaf University National Symposium on Dementia in Zambia
• Publications
• Students/Alumni
• Français ( French )

How can we help?

How to write a winning research proposal: a step-by-step guide.

• Amazing Opportunity to earn a Scholarship. Apply Now!
• Complete the following required fields to apply for a Unicaf scholarship for the programme of your choice.
• First Name *
• Last Name *
• Email Address *
• How can we get in touch?
• Fill out your contact details and one of our student advisors will get in touch with you soon.
• Country of Residence * Country of Residence* Ascension Island Andorra United Arab Emirates Afghanistan Antigua and Barbuda Anguilla Albania Armenia Netherlands Antilles Angola Antarctica Argentina American Samoa Austria Australia Aruba Ãland Islands Azerbaijan Bosnia and Herzegovina Barbados Bangladesh Belgium Burkina Faso Bulgaria Bahrain Burundi Benin Saint Barthélemy Bermuda Brunei Darussalam Bolivia Bonaire Brazil Bahamas Bhutan Bouvet Island Botswana Belarus Belize Canada Cocos (Keeling) Islands Congo, The Democratic Republic of The Central African Republic Congo Switzerland Cote D'ivoire Cook Islands Chile Cameroon China Colombia Costa Rica Cuba Cape Verde Curacao Christmas Island Cyprus Czech Republic Germany Diego Garcia Djibouti Denmark Dominica Dominican Republic Algeria Ceuta and Melilla Ecuador Estonia Egypt Western Sahara Eritrea Spain Ethiopia Finland Fiji Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Micronesia, Federated States of Faroe Islands France Gabon United Kingdom Grenada Georgia French Guiana Guernsey Ghana Gibraltar Greenland Gambia Guinea Guadeloupe Equatorial Guinea Greece South Georgia and The South Sandwich Islands Guatemala Guam Guinea-Bissau Guyana Hong Kong Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Honduras Croatia Haiti Hungary Canary Islands Indonesia Ireland Israel Isle of Man India British Indian Ocean Territory Iraq Iran, Islamic Republic of Iceland Italy Jersey Jamaica Jordan Japan Kenya Kyrgyzstan Cambodia Kiribati Comoros Saint Kitts and Nevis Korea, Democratic People's Republic South Korea Kuwait Cayman Islands Kazakhstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Lebanon Saint Lucia Liechtenstein Sri Lanka Liberia Lesotho Lithuania Luxembourg Latvia Libya Morocco Monaco Moldova, Republic of Montenegro Saint Martin Madagascar Marshall Islands Republic of North Macedonia Mali Myanmar (Burma) Mongolia Macau Northern Mariana Islands Martinique Mauritania Montserrat Malta Mauritius Maldives Malawi Mexico Malaysia Mozambique Namibia New Caledonia Niger Norfolk Island Nigeria Nicaragua Netherlands Norway Nepal Nauru Niue New Zealand Oman Panama Peru French Polynesia Papua New Guinea Philippines Pakistan Poland St. Pierre and Miquelon Pitcairn Island Puerto Rico Palestinian Territory, Occupied Portugal Palau Paraguay Qatar Reunion Island Romania Serbia Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Solomon Islands Seychelles Sudan Sweden Singapore Saint Helena Slovenia Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands Slovak Republic Sierra Leone San Marino Senegal Somalia Suriname South Sudan Sao Tome and Principe El Salvador Sint Maarten Syrian Arab Republic The Kingdom of Eswatini Tristan da Cunha Turks and Caicos Islands Chad French Southern Territories Togo Thailand Tajikistan Tokelau Timor-Leste Turkmenistan Tunisia Tonga Turkey Trinidad and Tobago Tuvalu Taiwan Tanzania Ukraine Uganda US Minor Outlying Islands United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Holy See (City Vatican State) Saint Vincent and The Grenadines Venezuela Virgin Islands (British) Virgin Islands (USA) Vietnam Vanuatu Wallis and Futuna Samoa Kosovo Yemen Mayotte South Africa Zambia Zimbabwe
• Phone Number *
• What is your programme of choice?
• Select the programme you would like to receive more information about, and provide us with your current education level.
• Choose your Programme * Choose your Programme* MBA LLM MSc Big Data Technologies MSc Business Psychology MSc Computer Science MSc Construction Engineering Management MSc Data Science MSc Information Security and Digital Forensics MSc in International Business Management MSc International Relations MSc in Oil and Gas with Energy Management MA in Criminology and Social Policy MA in Education MA in Human Resource Management MA in International Relations MA in Leadership in Education MA in Mass Communications MA in Nursing Master of Business Administration Master of Laws MSc in Civil Engineering MSc in Computing and Information Systems MSc in Digital Marketing MSc in International Public Health MSc in International Transport, Trade and Logistics MSc in Project Management MSc in Psychology Postgraduate Certificate in Education (International) Master of Business Administration MSc Public Health LLB (Hons) Law BA (Hons) Business Management BSc (Hons) Computing BSc (Hons) International Nursing [Progression Route] Master of Business Administration (MBA) - General Master of Business Administration (MBA) - Finance Master of Business Administration (MBA) - Health Management Master of Business Administration (MBA) - Management Master of Business Administration (MBA) - Management Information Systems Master of Business Administration (MBA) - Marketing Master of Business Administration (MBA) - Oil, Gas and Energy Management Master of Arts (MA) in Education Master of Public Administration (MPA) Master of Science (MSc) in Organisational Psychology Doctor of Business Administration (DBA) Doctor of Education (EdD) Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Accounting and Finance Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Business Administration Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Education Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Information Technology Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Marketing Management Bachelor of Arts (BA) in Business Administration Bachelor of Arts (BA) in Economics and Business Bachelor of Arts (BA) in Hospitality Management Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) in Primary Education Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) in Primary Education (Upgrading) Bachelor of Science (BSc) in Accounting Bachelor of Science (BSc) in Computer Science Bachelor of Science (BSc) in Finance Bachelor of Science (BSc) in Supply Chain Management and Logistics Master of Business Administration Master of Business Administration - Finance Master of Business Administration - Health Management Master of Business Administration – Human Resource Management Master of Business Administration - Management Master of Business Administration - Management Information Systems Master of Business Administration - Marketing Master of Business Administration - Oil, Gas and Energy Management Master of Business Administration - Project Management Master of Arts in Educational Leadership and Management Master of Arts in English Language and Literature Master of Laws (LLM) Master of Public Administration Master of Science in Computer Science Master of Science in Healthcare Management - ZM Master of Science in Managerial Psychology Master of Science in Sustainable Development Master of Science in Web Design and Development Master of Education Doctorate of Business Administration (DBA) Doctorate of Education (EdD) Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) – Business- ZM Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) - Education Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) - Law and Politics Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) - Public Health Bachelor in Hospitality Management Bachelor in Marketing Bachelor of Arts in English Language and Literature Bachelor of Business Administration - ZM Bachelor of Education in Pre-Primary Education Bachelor of Education in Primary Education Bachelor of Laws (LLB) Bachelor of Science in Accounting and Finance Bachelor of Science in Accounting and Finance - ACCA
• Current Level of Education * Current Level of Education* GCE 'A levels' or High School Diploma BTEC HND Foundation degree Bachelor degree Postgraduate certificate Postgraduate diploma Master‘s degree Doctoral Degree Other
• Consent * I agree to the Terms and Conditions , the Privacy Policy , the Cookie Policy and the Recording Policy (Agreement to the terms is required to submit form) *

When learning how to write a research proposal, it is important to start with a detailed plan that outlines the objectives, methodology, and significance of a research project. A research proposal is a crucial document for securing funding, gaining approval from academic committees, or outlining a structured plan for personal research endeavours. Crafting a compelling research proposal requires a clear understanding of the subject matter, a well-defined research question, and a meticulous approach to planning and presenting your research. This article will explore how to write a winning research proposal and how to navigate the challenges associated with it.

Understanding the Components of a Research Proposal

A well-structured research proposal typically includes several key components. Each section serves a specific purpose and contributes to the overall coherence and persuasiveness of the proposal.

The title of your research proposal should be concise, descriptive, and indicative of the main research question or hypothesis. A well-crafted title captures the essence of the study and draws the reader’s attention.

2. Abstract

The abstract is a brief summary of the research proposal, usually no more than 250 words. It should provide an overview of the research problem, objectives, methodology, and potential implications. The abstract should be clear and succinct, giving readers a quick understanding of what the proposal entails.

3. Introduction

The introduction sets the stage for your research by providing background information on the topic, outlining the research problem, and stating the research objectives. This section should:

• Introduce the topic: Provide context and explain why the topic is important.
• State the research problem: Clearly define the issue or gap in knowledge that your research aims to address.
• Outline the research objectives: Specify the aims of your research and the questions you intend to answer.

4. Literature Review

The literature review demonstrates your understanding of the existing research on your topic. This section should:

• Summarise relevant studies: Discuss key findings from previous research that relate to your topic.
• Identify gaps: Highlight areas where further research is needed.
• Justify your research: Explain how your study will contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

5. Research Methodology

The methodology section outlines the research design and the methods you will use to collect and analyse data. This section should include:

• Research design: Describe whether your study is qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods.
• Data collection methods: Detail how you will gather data (e.g., surveys, interviews, experiments).
• Data analysis methods: Explain how you will analyse the data (e.g., statistical analysis, thematic analysis).
• Ethical considerations: Address any ethical issues related to your research and how you will handle them.

6. Research Plan and Timeline

Provide a detailed plan of the research activities and a timeline for completing each phase of the project. This section should demonstrate that your research is feasible within the given timeframe.

7. Budget (if applicable)

If you are seeking funding, include a budget that outlines the estimated costs of your research. Be specific about how funds will be allocated (e.g., equipment, travel, participant incentives).

8. Expected Outcomes and Impact

Discuss the potential outcomes of your research and its significance. Explain how your findings could contribute to the field, inform policy, or have practical applications.

9. References

List all the sources you cited in your proposal. Use a consistent and appropriate citation style (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago).

Tips for Writing a Strong Research Proposal

Be clear and concise.

Use clear and straightforward language. Avoid jargon and complex sentences that might confuse readers. Aim for clarity and precision in explaining your research.

Stay Focused

Ensure that your proposal remains focused on the research question and objectives. Avoid including irrelevant information that does not contribute to the understanding of your proposed study.

Demonstrate Feasibility

Provide a realistic assessment of what can be achieved within the given timeframe and resources. Be honest about the scope of your research and any potential limitations.

Edit and Proofread

Your proposal must be clear, concise, and logically organised, following all rules of grammar, spelling, punctuation, and referencing. Adhere to the specific format and style required by your funding source or institution. Proofread your proposal multiple times, ideally with the help of a colleague or mentor, to identify and correct any mistakes or inconsistencies. Enhance the proposal’s structure, flow, and language to improve its overall quality. Ensure your proposal is compelling, engaging, and professionally presented.

Writing a research proposal is a critical step in the research process. It requires careful planning, a thorough understanding of the topic, and a clear presentation of your research plan. By following the structure outlined in this guide and paying attention to detail, you can craft a compelling research proposal that effectively communicates your ideas and secures the necessary support for your research.

At Unicaf , we offer comprehensive courses and resources to help you develop your research skills and succeed in your academic and professional endeavours. Explore our programmes today and take the next step in your research journey.

Learn by Subject

Learn how you can earn a scholarship., earn an internationally recognised degree from the comfort of your home., continue learning.

Elevate Your Career with a Master of Education from Unicaf University Zambia

30 Aug 2024 By Andrew Evgeniou

The Impact of Light Pollution on Wildlife and Human Health

Advances in Brain-Computer Interface Technology: Unlocking the Potential of the Human Mind

Privacy Overview

We Trust in Human Precision

20,000+ Professional Language Experts Ready to Help. Expertise in a variety of Niches.

API Solutions

• API Pricing
• Cost estimate
• Customer loyalty program
• Educational Discount
• Non-Profit Discount
• Green Initiative Discount1

Value-Driven Pricing

Unmatched expertise at affordable rates tailored for your needs. Our services empower you to boost your productivity.

• Special Discounts
• Enterprise transcription solutions
• Enterprise translation solutions
• Transcription/Caption API
• AI Transcription Proofreading API

Trusted by Global Leaders

GoTranscript is the chosen service for top media organizations, universities, and Fortune 50 companies.

GoTranscript

One of the Largest Online Transcription and Translation Agencies in the World. Founded in 2005.

Speaker 1: One of the most frequently asked questions that I am asked all the time across my social media platforms, across my YouTube, across my comments, is about the research process. So how do you start? Where do you even begin? You need to submit a dissertation, you need to submit a research proposal, you need to think of a hypothesis, you need to think of a problem statement, you need to find a gap in literature where do you even begin with the whole research process now it isn't as hard as it seems it's just one of those things that you're never told or you're never taught how to do it's one of those things that you just kind of figure out so hopefully in today's video i will be talking to you about the overview and kind of a quick beginner's guide to the research process, giving you the steps of how you get from zero to having something, having a question, having a hypothesis, having somewhere to start. I'm going to be making this into a bit of a series so in today's video I'm going to be giving you an overview as to the different chapters, the different sections of the process, how you get from nothing to something and then in the following videos I will be going through each of those sections in a bit more detail and hopefully if you are someone who is within one of those kind of parts you can just jump to that video and have a have a quick quick watch if you are someone who is just starting off then this is the best place for you to begin have a little think about how you're going to navigate your research process and how you're going to get from the start to the end it is not difficult but it does require a few steps, a few technicalities, which I'll talk you through today. I'll leave the timestamps down below so you feel free to go and jump to the different sections that you are interested in watching. And if you do enjoy this kind of video and you want to see the rest of the videos from me, then don't forget to subscribe to see more on my channel. So step number one is to choose a topic. Now this is the beginning of something beautiful. This is where you choose what you're actually going to be studying and when you're actually going to be reading about now it's really important that you have chosen a topic that you are interested in that there is an interest in within the research space that has something missing so you don't want to choose a topic that we know everything about you want to choose a topic that we don't know everything about and there are things that we want to try to find more about you want to choose a topic that is within your university guidelines so as much as i would love to do a research on the solar system about space well if my course is to do with cell biology well then i can't so you have to think about your limits think about what you are allowed to do within your university guidelines as well but you do need to think about taking that broad topic and making it into something a bit more narrow so it's not good enough to just say i want to do research on alzheimer's okay alzheimer's fine you've got a topic, but you now need to narrow it down. So what about it are you looking at? Are you looking at the risk factors? Are you looking at what happens once you have Alzheimer's? Are you looking at a specific group of people? Are you looking at a specific cell type? What is it that you are looking at? You need to narrow that down. In order to narrow it down, you need to do a bit of a literature search. So whilst choosing a topic, whilst in this first stage, you need to look at literature. So to find literature you want to go to different websites where you have literature and this could be for example Google Scholar is a good place to start, PubMed is a good place to start. These are places where you can find literature about that topic and kind of read around the subject and identify whether firstly is it something that you are actually interested in and secondly is there enough information for you to gather to be able to write your literature review in the future so that first step your first step of your research process is thinking about the topic because without a topic you there's nothing you can't do anything else so the first step has to always be to find a topic and think about it now once you've thought about a topic and you've narrowed it down to the thing that you're interested in at this stage you will then go to your supervisor to your lecturer to your professor to your mentor to your tutor and you will ask them do you think this is a good topic and that is where you will get some feedback and most likely you'll have to go back have another think or try to refine a bit more or try to think about it in a different way but that is always the first step. In the video that I make about finding a good topic we'll talk about it in a lot more depth but to start off with to introduce this is always the first step. So the second step is to identify a problem and this is what we like to call in as you know in research the gap in literature. So a problem slash gap in literature is the part of research that we that is missing. So when you do research in fact in order to graduate from a PhD you have to and this is one of the criteria you have to produce research it has to be in a thesis or in a in a published paper it has to be research it has to be a finding that is new something that we do not know before we did not know before your research right and that is the number one criteria for for actually getting a phd it is the fact that it has to be something new has to be something novel that you have discovered okay so you need to think about the gap in literature where is there a missing piece i understand this i understand that we know this we know that but what is there that we don't quite know and that is the bit that you are then going to try to identify during your research process right chosen a topic now we need to find the problem where is the missing information now in order to do this you need to have read a lot of papers around your topic. So that's why I said initially, you need to have had approval from your committee, from your tutor, your supervisor to say, right, that's okay. It's good for me to go there. Now you've got that topic that you're looking at. You then want to try to find the gap. Where are you going to slot in? What is it that you are going to provide in terms of knowledge? Now, the identifying a problem is actually quite an important and quite critical part of the research process it's almost impossible you to continue on with your research without having identified the problem because if you don't have a problem you don't know what it is you're looking at you don't know what methods you're using you don't know what your research question is going to be or your hypothesis so at this stage you have to have a very well-defined research problem and your question in order to continue on to the next steps so when i say research problem and we'll talk about this more in in the following video that i'm going to produce about it but when i talk about research problem it could be a number of different things so it could be that we understand or we have the knowledge of a certain situation but now you're comparing it to a different situation so it could be more theoretical where you're comparing two things to each other that haven't been compared before so that would be fine as long as what you have is something original or you may be trying to explore a specific relationship let's say for example in my case with my PhD I was looking at two different proteins and the relationship between them so that is one type of research that you can do as well and so just think about your topic and think about where the gap is in the literature you have to read a lot to be able to find this and a question I get a lot emailed to me and directed to me is about this problem so how do I find a problem like how do i find a gap in literature and it's almost impossible for me to to give you any answers because i have to have read all the papers within your topic in order to answer that question which is almost impossible so it's something that you have to do independently and you can always discuss with me you can discuss kind of trying to refine that question but for the most part you need to read around your subject yourself to get that question then step number three is to actually write down your research question now this is usually in the form maybe of a hypothesis or maybe it could be just a you know a standalone question so this is just you saying this is what i'm looking at so i'm looking at whether actin and myosin bind together to have an impact on the motility of the cortex like that is my question and then i'll have a hypothesis saying actin and myosin bind together and they do this so this is just my question and you're just following on from your problem so you've identified your topic you found the problem the gap in literature and then you write down what your question is so what it is exactly that you are looking for and this will be like your guiding star this will be the thing the question the statement that you have at the top you know at the top of your mind whenever you are looking at literature whenever you're writing a literature review whenever you speak to someone you have that question in mind and so that needs to be something that's really well defined it should also be really specific so it can't just be saying is obesity caused by i don't know fatty food i'm just giving a random example that is too vague is obesity in children in male in female different ages what fatty foods what like you need to be very very specific so specific that someone else should be able to pick up your research question and know what it is you're looking at they need to be able to know sort of what methods you're using is it qualitative or is it quantitative what type of research are you actually doing that should really be in the research question so a good research question is one where that is really well defined then step number four is to write a research design so this is where you're kind of creating a bit of a method a bit of a process within a process so you are now writing down and you're now thinking about how you're going to conduct this research so to follow this will be the research proposal but at this stage here you're just thinking about your research design so how are you going to get this research done what are the factors that you need to think about who are the people the participants that you may need are you doing a lab-based thing do you need cells are you you know what do you need humans do you need animals is it just a review paper so do you just need to think about researchers out there what kind of study are you going to conduct in order to find out the results and the answer to your question essentially the research design is a practical framework so it's giving laying out that frame for you in order to answer your research question. And here, it's more of a thinking process. It's more of a discussion. You might want to ask your supervisor, you might want to ask your tutor to talk about it. How are we going to get the answer to this question? And then to finish off the research process, you now want to write a research proposal. And I have a really good video about this, and I'll leave the link for it down below, where you are detailing all the steps for your research so you're detailing your the background of your research the literature review and you're justifying that there is a need for this research you then want to detail your methods your materials the aim your you know your timeline how long it's going to take you to do these things and then that document is what you take with you to your supervisor and say look this is my research proposal you might take it to a potential phd supervisor and say look this is what i've found and this is what i'm really interested in and here is the proposal and you have it all outlined there for you or it's a document that you're able to use in order to build upon your dissertation and so if you're writing an essay dissertation you are able to use that as well so with your research proposal you are detailing the context you are detailing the purpose the plan and your aims the whole process going from finding a topic finding a problem finding the research question defining the actual research and then now you're compiling all of that and you're putting it into a document called the research proposal and all of this information is in there someone should be able to pick that up see what you found find the review of the literature and say right this is a good study this is a good bit of research we are going to approve this and then you can go on and plan the rest of your research so i hope this video helped you summarizing the steps of the research process to begin with and as i mentioned i'm going to be doing each of these five steps as single videos so i can expand on them and i'll make it into a playlist so you're able to sort of follow up and click on the next couple videos but for now i hope this did help with thinking about the research process and thinking about maybe what stage you are at if you are at any of them if you do want further support you can contact me on thepagedoctor.com where i give support and we have a team of consultants top consultants and top editors that can support you through the process of writing your research proposal or even through the post process of thinking about how you're going to find a gap in literature how you're going to find you know your hypothesis and define that for you so don't forget to leave me a comment and let me know if this was helpful and don't forget to leave me a thumbs up and subscribe to see more from me and I'll see you in my next one. Bye.

Online Students

For All Online Programs

International Students

On Campus, need or have Visa

Campus Students

For All Campus Programs

Academic Referencing: How to Cite a Research Paper

Learning how to conduct accurate, discipline-specific academic research can feel daunting at first. But, with a solid understanding of the reasoning behind why we use academic citations coupled with knowledge of the basics, you’ll learn how to cite sources with accuracy and confidence.

When it comes to academic research, citing sources correctly is arguably as important as the research itself. "Your instructors are expecting your work to adhere to these professional standards," said Amanda Girard , research support manager of Shapiro Library at Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU).

With Shapiro Library for the past three years, Girard manages the library’s research support services, which includes SNHU’s 24/7 library chat and email support. She holds an undergraduate degree in professional writing and a graduate degree in library and information science. She said that accurate citations show that you have done your research on a topic and are knowledgeable about current ideas from those actively working in the field.

In other words, when you cite sources according to the academic style of your discipline, you’re giving credit where credit is due.

Why Cite Sources?

Citing sources properly ensures you’re following high academic and professional standards for integrity and ethics.

“When you cite a source, you can ethically use others’ research. If you are not adequately citing the information you claim in your work, it would be considered plagiarism ,” said Shannon Geary '16 , peer tutor at SNHU.

Geary has an undergraduate degree in communication  from SNHU and has served on the academic support team for close to 2 years. Her job includes helping students learn how to conduct research  and write academically.

“In academic writing, it is crucial to state where you are receiving your information from,” she said. “Citing your sources ensures that you are following academic integrity standards.”

According to Geary and Girard, several key reasons for citing sources are:

• Access. Citing sources points readers to original sources. If anyone wants to read more on your topic, they can use your citations as a roadmap to access the original sources.
• Attribution. Crediting the original authors, researchers and experts  shows that you’re knowledgeable about current ideas from those actively working in the field and adhering to high ethical standards, said Girard.
• Clarity. “By citing your sources correctly, your reader can follow along with your research,” Girard said.
• Consistency. Adhering to a citation style provides a framework for presenting ideas within similar academic fields. “Consistent formatting makes accessing, understanding and evaluating an author's findings easier for others in related fields of study,” Geary said.
• Credibility. Proper citation not only builds a writer's authority but also ensures the reliability of the work, according to Geary.

Ultimately, citing sources is a formalized way for you to share ideas as part of a bigger conversation among others in your field. It’s a way to build off of and reference one another’s ideas, Girard said.

How Do You Cite an Academic Research Paper?

Any time you use an original quote or paraphrase someone else’s ideas, you need to cite that material, according to Geary.

“The only time we do not need to cite is when presenting an original thought or general knowledge,” she said.

While the specific format for citing sources can vary based on the style used, several key elements are always included, according to Girard. Those are:

• Title of source
• Type of source, such as a journal, book, website or periodical

By giving credit to the authors, researchers and experts you cite, you’re building credibility. You’re showing that your argument is built on solid research.

“Proper citation not only builds a writer's authority but also ensures the reliability of the work,” Geary said. “Properly formatted citations are a roadmap for instructors and other readers to verify the information we present in our work.”

Common Citation Styles in Academic Research

Certain disciplines adhere to specific citation standards because different disciplines prioritize certain information and research styles . The most common citation styles used in academic research, according to Geary, are:

• American Psychological Association, known as APA . This style is standard in the social sciences such as psychology, education and communication. “In these fields, research happens rapidly, which makes it exceptionally important to use current research,” Geary said.
• Modern Language Association, known as MLA . This style is typically used in literature and humanities because of the emphasis on literature analysis. “When citing in MLA, there is an emphasis on the author and page number, allowing the audience to locate the original text that is being analyzed easily,” Geary said.
• Chicago Manual of Style, known as Chicago . This style is typically used in history, business and sometimes humanities. “(Chicago) offers flexibility because of the use of footnotes, which can be seen as less distracting than an in-text citation,” Geary said.

The benefit of using the same format as other researchers within a discipline is that the framework of presenting ideas allows you to “speak the same language,” according to Girard.

APA Citation for College: A Brief Overview

Are you writing a paper that needs to use APA citation, but don’t know what that means? No worries. You’ve come to the right place.

How to Use MLA Formatting: A Brief Overview

Are you writing a paper for which you need to know how to use MLA formatting, but don’t know what that means? No worries. You’ve come to the right place.

How to Ensure Proper Citations

Keeping track of your research as you go is one of the best ways to ensure you’re citing appropriately and correctly based on the style that your academic discipline uses.

“Through careful citation, authors ensure their audience can distinguish between borrowed material and original thoughts, safeguarding their academic reputation and following academic honesty policies,” Geary said.

Some tips that she and Girard shared to ensure you’re citing sources correctly include:

• Keep track of sources as you work. Writers should keep track of their sources every time an idea is not theirs, according to Geary. “You don’t want to find the perfect research study and misplace its source information, meaning you’d have to omit it from your paper,” she said.
• Practice. Even experienced writers need to check their citations before submitting their work. “Citing requires us to pay close attention to detail, so always start your citation process early and go slow to ensure you don’t make mistakes,” said Geary. In time, citing sources properly becomes faster and easier.
• Use an Online Tool . Geary recommends the Shapiro Library citation guide . You can find sample papers, examples of how to cite in the different academic styles and up-to-date citation requirements, along with information and examples for APA, MLA and Chicago style citations.
• Work with a Tutor. A tutor can offer support along with tips to help you learn the process of academic research. Students at SNHU can connect with free peer tutoring through the Academic Support tab in their online courses, though many colleges and universities offer peer tutoring.

Find Your Program

How to cite a reference in academic writing.

A citation consists of two pieces: an in-text citation that is typically short and a longer list of references or works cited (depending on the style used) at the end of the paper.

“In-text citations immediately acknowledge the use of external source information and its exact location,” Geary said. While each style uses a slightly different format for in-text citations that reference the research, you may expect to need the page number, author’s name and possibly date of publication in parentheses at the end of a sentence or passage, according to Geary.

A longer entry listing the complete details of the resource you referenced should also be included on the references or works cited page at the end of the paper. The full citation is provided with complete details of the source, such as author, title, publication date and more, Geary said.

The two-part aspect of citations is because of readability. “You can imagine how putting the full citation would break up the flow of a paper,” Girard said. “So, a shortened version is used (in the text).”

“For example, if an in-text citation reads (Jones, 2024), the reader immediately knows that the ideas presented are coming from Jones’s work, and they can explore the comprehensive citation on the final page,” she said.

The in-text citation and full citation together provide a transparent trail of the author's process of engaging with research.

“Their combined use also facilitates further research by following a standardized style (APA, MLA, Chicago), guaranteeing that other scholars can easily connect and build upon their work in the future,” Geary said.

Developing and demonstrating your research skills, enhancing your work’s credibility and engaging ethically with the intellectual contributions of others are at the core of the citation process no matter which style you use.

A degree can change your life. Choose your program  from 200+ SNHU degrees that can take you where you want to go.

A former higher education administrator, Dr. Marie Morganelli is a career educator and writer. She has taught and tutored composition, literature, and writing at all levels from middle school through graduate school. With two graduate degrees in English language and literature, her focus — whether teaching or writing — is in helping to raise the voices of others through the power of storytelling. Connect with her on LinkedIn .

Explore more content like this article

What is the Difference Between Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees?

What is Considered Plagiarism And How to Avoid It

Degrees vs. Certificate Programs: What's the Difference?

About southern new hampshire university.

SNHU is a nonprofit, accredited university with a mission to make high-quality education more accessible and affordable for everyone.

Founded in 1932, and online since 1995, we’ve helped countless students reach their goals with flexible, career-focused programs . Our 300-acre campus in Manchester, NH is home to over 3,000 students, and we serve over 135,000 students online. Visit our about SNHU  page to learn more about our mission, accreditations, leadership team, national recognitions and awards.

Americans love nature but don’t feel empowered to protect it, new research shows

Assistant Professor, Indiana University

Disclosure statement

Jessica Eise receives funding from the National Science Foundation to explore how to create enduring change in environmental public behavior to support actions that will effectively address climate change and its impacts on society.

Indiana University provides funding as a member of The Conversation US.

View all partners

Climate change has been in the news for more than 40 years . It’s typically covered as a scientific or political issue . However, social scientists like me have found that feelings and values are what drive people toward broad, collective change – not charts, graphs or images.

Surveys confirm that the majority of Americans now believe that climate change is real . But many adults seem to feel too exhausted, defeated or powerless to do anything about it.

I am leading a large multiyear research project funded by the National Science Foundation that examines how to tap into morals, ethics and spirituality to create enduring behavioral shifts on this issue. In the pilot study for this project, which has not been published yet, we recently surveyed 275 U.S. adults to understand their relationship with and feelings toward the natural world.

This is a first step toward understanding how to start communicating differently about climate change. Climate change is altering weather patterns, temperatures and seasons, which people are now beginning to feel in nearly all locations in the world.

Many people said that when they thought of nature, it raised happy memories of climbing trees, stomping in puddles or watching sunsets. But underneath, they described fraught relationships with the environment – a tense blend of love, longing, guilt and worry.

No predetermined answers

We used an open-ended survey that allowed respondents to answer however they wished, without predetermined choices. For example, we asked “What is your personal relationship with nature?” and gave respondents a blank box to write down their own interpretation.

Open-ended questions are coded line by line by a team of researchers – a time-consuming process that limits the number of survey participants. Large surveys typically use close-ended questions that are more straightforward to analyze and are easier to administer to larger numbers of people.

However, using this approach meant that responses were not limited or prompted by a researcher’s ideas. The themes we found arose out of participants’ own thoughts and feelings.

How do people think about and engage with nature?

To understand people’s relationships with nature, we asked several questions. In one set we asked, “How are humans and nature related? What is the role of humans in nature?” Over half of respondents (53%) noted that we should care for and preserve Earth. Some 45% explicitly mentioned the benefits of nature for human health and well-being. And 27% discussed how humans depend on Earth and its resources.

About a quarter of responses (26%) mentioned that humans can choose to be positive or negative forces in nature. This was closely followed by statements that humans take too much from nature (23%).

When analyzing another question, “What is your personal relationship with nature?” we noted prominent themes and how participants tended to connect them to one another. For instance, participants reported that, to them, nature represented beauty, health, joy, childhood and escape.

To connect with nature, respondents said they commonly engaged in activities such as taking walks outdoors, going camping, watching sunsets or gardening. However, many said that barriers – such as time constraints, lack of physical access or being distracted by technology – prevented them from connecting with nature in the ways they wanted.

Wanting to do better

Underlying all of this were strong feelings of love, longing, worry and guilt. These emotions showed up most commonly in responses – usually through a literal statement, although sometimes by alluding to the emotion.

When discussing love, participants were most direct. They usually simply said, “I love it, honestly” or “Love it.” Longing was often expressed in slightly more varied ways, such as stating “It makes me sad to not be outside as much as I would hope to,” or “Wish I could go hiking and other things to get closer.”

Worry and guilt emerged in responses such as: “I try my best to respect the environment and take care of it. I know I can do better”; “I take care of it the best I can, but I wouldn’t say I make any large gestures either”; and “I don’t appreciate it enough.” One person simply responded: “Appreciation, respect, care, sadness.”

This question had asked, “What is your personal relationship with nature?” We did not guide respondents to list their feelings. Yet, the responses were laden with emotions.

No sense of how to help

The way in which people talk about or portray an issue – their words, symbols, phrases or images – is called a frame. Frames highlight a subset of an issue , which then generally becomes people’s primary way of thinking about something.

Positive self-efficacy frames – in other words, a belief that people can make a difference – have been largely absent from conversations about climate change . Political or distant environmental frames are more common.

For example, prominent images typically contain political figures or distant environmental impacts, such as smokestacks or melting ice . These tend to leave people feeling powerless or feeling that they have little to offer.

Our survey findings reflect these frames. People feel longing, guilt and worry toward the environment, with virtually no mention of hope, excitement or empowerment.

From paralysis to engagement

Social scientists have been learning through climate change research that some emotions paralyze and others catalyze . Is it possible to reduce paralysis and match love for nature with hope?

Other surveys show that Americans’ concern for future generations is rising, that they are worried about harm to plants and animals and that nearly all groups see human actions as the cause of these concerns . However, as long as people lack a personal sense that they have the ability to make change, they won’t take steps such as telling political leaders to act.

Our next phase of research will build on findings from this survey by examining how ethical, moral and spiritual considerations influence behavior . We want to know what’s required for these ideas to invoke a sense of personal empowerment that’s necessary to take action.

When someone focuses on their connection with one another and future generations, it draws on a different set of ethics and sense of self – and that can motivate action.

• Climate change
• Environment
• Public opinion
• Environmental action

Director of STEM

Community member - Training Delivery and Development Committee (Volunteer part-time)

Chief Executive Officer

Finance Business Partner

Head of Evidence to Action

• Public Service

• Why Maine Law?
• Visits and Events
• Your Future
• Dual Degree Programs
• Environmental Law
• Information Privacy Law
• Transactional Law
• Tuition and Fees
• Admitted Students
• Entering Class Profile
• Academic Calendar
• Request a Transcript
• Academic Program
• Clinics and Centers
• Graduate and Professional Center
• Legal Research and Writing
• Externships
• Law Journals
• Visiting, Fellows, and Scholars
• Faculty Research Blog
• Student Affairs
• Student Bar Association
• Student Organizations
• Health and Wellness
• Maine Law Apparel
• Confidential Resource Advisor
• Accessibility
• Fellowships
• Alumni Pathways & Profiles
• Reciprocity Policy
• Non-discrimination Policy – CSO
• DEI Committee
• DEI Faculty Engagement
• PLUS Program
• Statement of Commitment to Diversity
• Non-Discrimination Policy

The Class of 2027: Environmental and rural law programs bring 1L to Maine Law

For the past couple of years, incoming 1L Thacher Carter worked as the Municipal Policy Associate with  Maine Farmland Trust. The job involved extensive research and writing to update the organization’s municipal planning guide, a resource for local governments on how to responsibly promote agriculture and protect farmland in their communities. 

When Carter stepped into the position it felt a bit like falling off a diving board into the deep end. 

“One of the first things I began digging into was the dense legal language and layout of land use ordinances,” he recalled. “As the months moved by, however, I really started to learn the language. Now, I can read through land use ordinances without any trouble.” 

The experience gave Carter an appreciation for his own aptitudes as well as a deepening interest in attending law school. Legal jargon, case studies, critical thinking, all facets of Carter’s job he enjoyed are also the hallmarks of a legal education. 

While Carter became interested in a law degree generally, several aspects of his personal and professional life compelled him towards Maine Law specifically.  

As an undergraduate, Carter majored in environmental studies and English at St. Lawrence University. He grew up always outdoors in Maine and spent his summers at college as part of a hut crew for the Appalachian Mountain Club. In the same way his work with the trust broadened his horizons and deepened his capabilities, working along the Appalachian Trail in the White Mountains taught him a lot about himself and instilled in him an abiding love of nature. 

“Living in the national forest really grew my appreciation for the natural environment, and I learned a lot about collaborative work  and dedication during those summers,” he explained. “Being tasked with everything from meal prep to search and rescue really expands your notion of what you can accomplish.” 

All of these experiences led Carter to Maine Law and its Environmental Law program. He is also the recipient of the Energy and Environmental Law Fellowship, which will facilitate the experiential learning Carter craves. 

“I’m really excited by all the experiences available at Maine Law,” he added. “I’m also very interested in the option of doing a semester with the Rural Practice Clinic up in Fort Kent. Long-term I’m interested in remaining in Maine and I think understanding rural practice would be an asset.” 

Finally, Carter said, he landed on Maine Law for a reason he feels isn’t discussed enough; it’s affordability. Law school can be a massive undertaking both intellectually and financially, and Carter said it is difficult to find a program that feels financially viable without sacrificing quality. 

“I think that this is something that should be talked about and emphasized more in the world of academia,” he said. “I know it’s a priority to a lot of students, and I really respect that it remains a priority for Maine Law.” 

Recent Posts

The Class of 2027: 1L finds a home in Maine and community through Maine Law

Having grown up with a father in the military, incoming 1L Shiloh Donnell finds it...

The Class of 2027: How a childhood in South Africa is driving a 1L’s education in Maine

Joseph Inabanza, incoming 1L, has lived a life shaded by experiences of exclusion and isolation....

The Class of 2027: Veteran prepares for her second act at Maine Law

In the next stage of her career, Amanda Violette was looking for two things. “I...

Maine Law’s Privacy Program Continues to Grow

Success Borne of Necessity The University of Maine School of Law is at the forefront...

Maine Regional Care Teams supported over 165 justice-impacted youths over initiative’s three years

Regional Care Teams, a collaborative of the University of Southern Maine’s Catherine Cutler Institute, the...

Maine Law faculty and staff share favorite summer reads

Everyone has that one book that reminds them of summer, the one they pick up...

Friends and Defenders of the Casco Bay

The Maine Law graduates fighting pollution and climate change in Maine’s Casco Bay Sara Freshley...

Complex Problem-Solving Across Disciplines

“Interdisciplinary work requires venturing beyond the comfort of the known — the conventions of a...

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election results
• Google trends
• AP & Elections
• U.S. Open Tennis
• Paralympic Games
• College football
• Auto Racing
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

A rare orchid survives on a few tracts of prairie. Researchers want to learn its secrets

The western prairie fringed orchid is seen blooming on Wednesday, July 3, 2024, on the Sheyenne National Grassland in North Dakota. The orchid has declined due to loss of its native prairie habitat, among other factors, and is classified as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act. (AP Photo/Jack Dura)

A bloom of the western prairie fringed orchid is seen Wednesday, July 3, 2024, on the Sheyenne National Grassland in North Dakota. The orchid is a threatened species protected by the federal Endangered Species Act. (AP Photo/Jack Dura)

This July 9, 2024 photo provided by Steve Travers shows Josie Pickar and Kiana Sayler recording GPS coordinates of a western prairie fringed orchid on Tuesday, July 9, 2024, near Gardenton, Manitoba. (Steve Travers via AP)

This photo provided by Steve Travers shows Josie Pickar, Kiana Sayler and Megan Okke gathering soil samples near western prairie fringed orchids on Monday, June 17, 2024, near Gardenton, Manitoba. (Steve Travers via AP)

This photo provided by Steve Travers shows Trinity Atkins extracting DNA from a sample of a western prairie fringed orchid on Wednesday, March 6, 2024, at the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory in Champaign, Ill. (Steve Travers via AP)

• Copy Link copied

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — On a remote tallgrass prairie in North Dakota, a secretive orchid pokes up from the ground. You’ll only find it if you know where to look.

The striking, bright white blooms of the western prairie fringed orchid are elusive to fans who try to catch a glimpse — and as a threatened species protected by the federal Endangered Species Act, it is also a puzzle for researchers trying to learn more about the orchid’s reproduction and role in its ecosystem.

Loss of its native prairie habitat has threatened the orchid. About 60% of native orchids in the U.S. and Canada are rapidly disappearing due to climate change, habitat loss and pollinator declines, said Julianne McGuinness, program development coordinator for the North American Orchid Conservation Center. Those showy, flowering plants beloved for their beauty can be an early indicator of decline occurring unnoticed in its environment.

“They’re sort of like the canary in the coal mine for the rest of our ecosystems,” McGuinness said.

Graduate students from North Dakota State University in Fargo are hoping to learn more about the pollinators and reproduction of the western prairie fringed orchid . Their work includes logging the GPS coordinates of orchids at 20 various sites in Minnesota, North Dakota and Manitoba, Canada, swabbing orchids for tiny amounts of genetic material from insects, and attracting pollinating insects at night with blacklights and sheets.

Years ago, Steve Travers, an associate professor at the university’s Department of Biological Sciences, was fascinated to learn about the orchid — “these big, beautiful, 2-foot tall, ginormous, gorgeous things that were pollinated at night.”

“I have a hell of a hard time finding it sometimes,” he said. “And when people see it the first time, there’s like almost this rapid intake of breath. I mean, it’s so big and it’s just spectacular.”

The orchid is a unique insight into its nearly vanished ecosystem — the tallgrass prairie — as well as for understanding connectedness with pollinators and other plants, and is a good model system for studying rarity, Travers said.

The orchid’s only known pollinators are hawkmoths, big moths that are just the right fit and size to reach the orchid’s nectar, in a long spur, while also pollinating the plant.

The western prairie fringed orchid is mostly found in reserves, such as the Sheyenne National Grassland in North Dakota and the Manitoba Tall Grass Prairie Preserve. The peak of the orchid’s bloom was roughly mid-July.

Populations can be as small as one plant or as large as 500 to 1,000, Travers said. Once located, the researchers log the individual orchids’ GPS coordinates to within 10 centimeters (4 inches) accuracy so they can return later. Finding the orchid when it isn’t flowering is like looking for a brown stick in a big, green field, Travers said.

Graduate student Josie Pickar’s work is focused on what affects the orchid’s reproductive success, including soil nutrients and pollinator service. She’s been traveling to about 20 sites, looking at subsets of orchids, to gather soil samples and moisture content, count flowers, and record plant heights and conditions, as well as monitoring the orchids via trail cameras for what might be eating them. In September, she’ll go back and count the orchids’ seed capsules, which are extremely hard to find.

To find the orchids, the researchers used rough coordinates from land-management agencies. They’ve dealt with ticks galore, crossed a beaver dam while wearing waders and seen bear tracks in the process.

“It’s been pretty wild,” Pickar said.

She’s put in days of more than 12 hours, visiting about two orchid sites per day that could be up to three hours away — her team donning gear such as long pants, long-sleeve shirts, hats and sometimes mosquito-thwarting head nets. She called the orchid “almost alienlike when you see it out on the prairie.”

Graduate student Trinity Atkins, who was out from 7 a.m. to 2 a.m., is looking at the orchid’s pollination networks: the pollinators that visit the orchid and what other plants they visit, too.

She swabs the orchids at all her sites, collects moths to see where they are going and uses a molecular technique called eDNA metabarcoding to see which pollinators visited the orchid, she said. Environmental DNA is genetic material left behind from, for instance, a butterfly visiting a flower. Some studies indicate daytime pollinators might be at work, she said.

Studying the orchid’s pollinators requires work at all hours of the day.

In the morning, Atkins would swab orchids for eDNA before it degrades. In the afternoon, she would survey for other nearby plants that could be attracting pollinators. And at night, she would be blacklighting at prairie sites, collecting moths and taking measurements.

Travers said the research is important in terms of biodiversity, of which rare species are an integral component for their contributions to their ecosystem.

While orchids are found all over the world, the western prairie fringed orchid is specifically adapted to the tallgrass prairie, he said.

“I kind of find that really interesting that you get all this variety in the genus and then, boom, it comes here and it turns into this huge, nocturnally pollinated thing, and I’d love to know why. Why did that happen? But that’s a whole other question,” Travers said.